Interpreter change

Ian Piumarta piumarta at
Mon Apr 17 22:47:08 UTC 2006

On Apr 17, 2006, at 3:38 PM, John M McIntosh wrote:

> so if next wakeup tick  is less than 16ms then call aioPoll(0) then  
> nanosleep for upto 16ms ish then call aioPoll(0)  mmm I guess that  
> services any interrupt that woke things up.
> and if greater than 16ms  you end up sleeping in select() via  
> callling aioPoll(waitfor).

I couldn't have described it better.

> mind I didn't look to see what handleEvents() does...  Perhaps you  
> never sleep?

handleEvents() returns 1 if any UI events came in (or if the event  
buffer is not empty), otherwise 0 to indicate no UI activity to worry  

In other words, ioRelinquishProc only sleeps if there is no UI  
activity and no descriptor is ready for a pending i/o operation.

> Any chance you could fold the nanosleep back into the aioPoll()  
> logic instead of making it a special case outside of select logic  
> in aioPoll()

Would this be particularly helpful to you?  I never call aioPoll()  
with non-zero from anywhere except relinquishProc, so for me it's  
better being outside aioPoll.  But if you'd find it useful inside  
aioPoll then I don't think moving it there would break anything.


More information about the Vm-dev mailing list