[PATCH 2/9] server: pending asyncs should only affect FD_READ/FD_WRITE/FD_CLOSE messages

[Mike Kaplinskiy]

On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 3:52 PM, Alexandre Julliard <julliard at winehq.org> wrote:
> Mike Kaplinskiy <mike.kaplinskiy at gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Hope this makes the rationale a bit clearer. Although admittedly the
>> patch does allow for some busy waiting since
>> if (mask & FD_READ  || async_waiting( sock->read_q )) ev |= POLLIN | POLLPRI;
>> should be more like
>> if ( (mask & FD_READ && !async_busy( sock->read_q ))  ||
>> async_waiting( sock->read_q )) ev |= POLLIN | POLLPRI;
>> which probably should've went into #3.
>>
>> Should I merge 2&3 and resend?
>
> I think there's more to it than merging them. If you have to ignore
> events you are doing something wrong, because you shouldn't get the
> events in the first place.
>

Well we wouldn't be ignoring them, just not using them for
FD_READ/FD_WRITE. We need POLLIN/POLLOUT when we have pending asyncs,
but we shouldn't set FD_READ/FD_WRITE every time we get a
POLLIN/POLLOUT since these events were needed by the overlapped
operations.

Mike.