 Messages in this thread SubjectRe: [take14 0/3] kevent: Generic
event handling mechanism. [Sorry for the length, but I want to
be clear.]  As promised, before Monday (at least my time), here
are my thoughts on the proposed kevent interfaces. Not
necessarily well ordered:  - one point of critique which applied
to many proposals over the years: multiplexer syscalls a bad,
really bad. They are more complicated to use at userlevel and in
the kernel. We've seen more than once that unimplemented
functions are not reported correctly with ENOSYS. Just use
individual syscalls. Adding them is cheap and probably overall
less expensive than the multiplexer.  Events to wait for are
basically all those with syscalls which can potentially block
indefinitely:  - file descriptor - POSIX message queues (these
are in fact file descriptors but let's make it legitimate) -
timer expiration - signals (just as sigwait, not normal delivery
instead of a handler) - futexes (needs a lot more investigation)
- SysV message queues - SysV