*** empty log message ***

[software/libev.git] / ev.3

diff --git a/ev.3 b/ev.3
index 7689fc0db0ef47b874ed4be15edbfbb54620ddb5..2129dc3002c1baa745b2640b103da86f35244408 100644 (file)
--- a/ev.3
+++ b/ev.3
@@ -257,8 +257,8 @@ library in any way.
 Returns the current time as libev would use it. Please note that the
 \&\f(CW\*(C`ev_now\*(C'\fR function is usually faster and also often returns the timestamp
 you actually want to know.
 Returns the current time as libev would use it. Please note that the
 \&\f(CW\*(C`ev_now\*(C'\fR function is usually faster and also often returns the timestamp
 you actually want to know.

-.IP "void ev_sleep (ev_tstamp interval)" 4
-.IX Item "void ev_sleep (ev_tstamp interval)"
+.IP "ev_sleep (ev_tstamp interval)" 4
+.IX Item "ev_sleep (ev_tstamp interval)"

 Sleep for the given interval: The current thread will be blocked until
 either it is interrupted or the given time interval has passed. Basically
 this is a subsecond-resolution \f(CW\*(C`sleep ()\*(C'\fR.
 Sleep for the given interval: The current thread will be blocked until
 either it is interrupted or the given time interval has passed. Basically
 this is a subsecond-resolution \f(CW\*(C`sleep ()\*(C'\fR.


@@ -453,15 +453,24 @@ environment variable.
 This is your standard \fIselect\fR\|(2) backend. Not \fIcompletely\fR standard, as
 libev tries to roll its own fd_set with no limits on the number of fds,
 but if that fails, expect a fairly low limit on the number of fds when
 This is your standard \fIselect\fR\|(2) backend. Not \fIcompletely\fR standard, as
 libev tries to roll its own fd_set with no limits on the number of fds,
 but if that fails, expect a fairly low limit on the number of fds when

-using this backend. It doesn't scale too well (O(highest_fd)), but its usually
-the fastest backend for a low number of fds.
+using this backend. It doesn't scale too well (O(highest_fd)), but its
+usually the fastest backend for a low number of (low\-numbered :) fds.
+.Sp
+To get good performance out of this backend you need a high amount of
+parallelity (most of the file descriptors should be busy). If you are
+writing a server, you should \f(CW\*(C`accept ()\*(C'\fR in a loop to accept as many
+connections as possible during one iteration. You might also want to have
+a look at \f(CW\*(C`ev_set_io_collect_interval ()\*(C'\fR to increase the amount of
+readyness notifications you get per iteration.

 .ie n .IP """EVBACKEND_POLL""    (value 2, poll backend, available everywhere except on windows)" 4
 .el .IP "\f(CWEVBACKEND_POLL\fR    (value 2, poll backend, available everywhere except on windows)" 4
 .IX Item "EVBACKEND_POLL    (value 2, poll backend, available everywhere except on windows)"
 .ie n .IP """EVBACKEND_POLL""    (value 2, poll backend, available everywhere except on windows)" 4
 .el .IP "\f(CWEVBACKEND_POLL\fR    (value 2, poll backend, available everywhere except on windows)" 4
 .IX Item "EVBACKEND_POLL    (value 2, poll backend, available everywhere except on windows)"

-And this is your standard \fIpoll\fR\|(2) backend. It's more complicated than
-select, but handles sparse fds better and has no artificial limit on the
-number of fds you can use (except it will slow down considerably with a
-lot of inactive fds). It scales similarly to select, i.e. O(total_fds).
+And this is your standard \fIpoll\fR\|(2) backend. It's more complicated
+than select, but handles sparse fds better and has no artificial
+limit on the number of fds you can use (except it will slow down
+considerably with a lot of inactive fds). It scales similarly to select,
+i.e. O(total_fds). See the entry for \f(CW\*(C`EVBACKEND_SELECT\*(C'\fR, above, for
+performance tips.

 .ie n .IP """EVBACKEND_EPOLL""   (value 4, Linux)" 4
 .el .IP "\f(CWEVBACKEND_EPOLL\fR   (value 4, Linux)" 4
 .IX Item "EVBACKEND_EPOLL   (value 4, Linux)"
 .ie n .IP """EVBACKEND_EPOLL""   (value 4, Linux)" 4
 .el .IP "\f(CWEVBACKEND_EPOLL\fR   (value 4, Linux)" 4
 .IX Item "EVBACKEND_EPOLL   (value 4, Linux)"


@@ -471,7 +480,7 @@ like O(total_fds) where n is the total number of fds (or the highest fd),
 epoll scales either O(1) or O(active_fds). The epoll design has a number
 of shortcomings, such as silently dropping events in some hard-to-detect
 cases and rewiring a syscall per fd change, no fork support and bad
 epoll scales either O(1) or O(active_fds). The epoll design has a number
 of shortcomings, such as silently dropping events in some hard-to-detect
 cases and rewiring a syscall per fd change, no fork support and bad

-support for dup:
+support for dup.

 .Sp
 While stopping, setting and starting an I/O watcher in the same iteration
 will result in some caching, there is still a syscall per such incident
 .Sp
 While stopping, setting and starting an I/O watcher in the same iteration
 will result in some caching, there is still a syscall per such incident


@@ -482,28 +491,50 @@ very well if you register events for both fds.
 Please note that epoll sometimes generates spurious notifications, so you
 need to use non-blocking I/O or other means to avoid blocking when no data
 (or space) is available.
 Please note that epoll sometimes generates spurious notifications, so you
 need to use non-blocking I/O or other means to avoid blocking when no data
 (or space) is available.

+.Sp
+Best performance from this backend is achieved by not unregistering all
+watchers for a file descriptor until it has been closed, if possible, i.e.
+keep at least one watcher active per fd at all times.
+.Sp
+While nominally embeddeble in other event loops, this feature is broken in
+all kernel versions tested so far.

 .ie n .IP """EVBACKEND_KQUEUE""  (value 8, most \s-1BSD\s0 clones)" 4
 .el .IP "\f(CWEVBACKEND_KQUEUE\fR  (value 8, most \s-1BSD\s0 clones)" 4
 .IX Item "EVBACKEND_KQUEUE  (value 8, most BSD clones)"
 Kqueue deserves special mention, as at the time of this writing, it
 .ie n .IP """EVBACKEND_KQUEUE""  (value 8, most \s-1BSD\s0 clones)" 4
 .el .IP "\f(CWEVBACKEND_KQUEUE\fR  (value 8, most \s-1BSD\s0 clones)" 4
 .IX Item "EVBACKEND_KQUEUE  (value 8, most BSD clones)"
 Kqueue deserves special mention, as at the time of this writing, it

-was broken on \fIall\fR BSDs (usually it doesn't work with anything but
-sockets and pipes, except on Darwin, where of course it's completely
-useless. On NetBSD, it seems to work for all the \s-1FD\s0 types I tested, so it
-is used by default there). For this reason it's not being \*(L"autodetected\*(R"
+was broken on all BSDs except NetBSD (usually it doesn't work reliably
+with anything but sockets and pipes, except on Darwin, where of course
+it's completely useless). For this reason it's not being \*(L"autodetected\*(R"

 unless you explicitly specify it explicitly in the flags (i.e. using
 \&\f(CW\*(C`EVBACKEND_KQUEUE\*(C'\fR) or libev was compiled on a known-to-be-good (\-enough)
 system like NetBSD.
 .Sp
 unless you explicitly specify it explicitly in the flags (i.e. using
 \&\f(CW\*(C`EVBACKEND_KQUEUE\*(C'\fR) or libev was compiled on a known-to-be-good (\-enough)
 system like NetBSD.
 .Sp

+You still can embed kqueue into a normal poll or select backend and use it
+only for sockets (after having made sure that sockets work with kqueue on
+the target platform). See \f(CW\*(C`ev_embed\*(C'\fR watchers for more info.
+.Sp

 It scales in the same way as the epoll backend, but the interface to the
 It scales in the same way as the epoll backend, but the interface to the

-kernel is more efficient (which says nothing about its actual speed,
-of course). While stopping, setting and starting an I/O watcher does
-never cause an extra syscall as with epoll, it still adds up to two event
-changes per incident, support for \f(CW\*(C`fork ()\*(C'\fR is very bad and it drops fds
-silently in similarly hard-to-detetc cases.
+kernel is more efficient (which says nothing about its actual speed, of
+course). While stopping, setting and starting an I/O watcher does never
+cause an extra syscall as with \f(CW\*(C`EVBACKEND_EPOLL\*(C'\fR, it still adds up to
+two event changes per incident, support for \f(CW\*(C`fork ()\*(C'\fR is very bad and it
+drops fds silently in similarly hard-to-detect cases.
+.Sp
+This backend usually performs well under most conditions.
+.Sp
+While nominally embeddable in other event loops, this doesn't work
+everywhere, so you might need to test for this. And since it is broken
+almost everywhere, you should only use it when you have a lot of sockets
+(for which it usually works), by embedding it into another event loop
+(e.g. \f(CW\*(C`EVBACKEND_SELECT\*(C'\fR or \f(CW\*(C`EVBACKEND_POLL\*(C'\fR) and using it only for
+sockets.

 .ie n .IP """EVBACKEND_DEVPOLL"" (value 16, Solaris 8)" 4
 .el .IP "\f(CWEVBACKEND_DEVPOLL\fR (value 16, Solaris 8)" 4
 .IX Item "EVBACKEND_DEVPOLL (value 16, Solaris 8)"
 .ie n .IP """EVBACKEND_DEVPOLL"" (value 16, Solaris 8)" 4
 .el .IP "\f(CWEVBACKEND_DEVPOLL\fR (value 16, Solaris 8)" 4
 .IX Item "EVBACKEND_DEVPOLL (value 16, Solaris 8)"

-This is not implemented yet (and might never be).
+This is not implemented yet (and might never be, unless you send me an
+implementation). According to reports, \f(CW\*(C`/dev/poll\*(C'\fR only supports sockets
+and is not embeddable, which would limit the usefulness of this backend
+immensely.

 .ie n .IP """EVBACKEND_PORT""    (value 32, Solaris 10)" 4
 .el .IP "\f(CWEVBACKEND_PORT\fR    (value 32, Solaris 10)" 4
 .IX Item "EVBACKEND_PORT    (value 32, Solaris 10)"
 .ie n .IP """EVBACKEND_PORT""    (value 32, Solaris 10)" 4
 .el .IP "\f(CWEVBACKEND_PORT\fR    (value 32, Solaris 10)" 4
 .IX Item "EVBACKEND_PORT    (value 32, Solaris 10)"


@@ -513,12 +544,19 @@ it's really slow, but it still scales very well (O(active_fds)).
 Please note that solaris event ports can deliver a lot of spurious
 notifications, so you need to use non-blocking I/O or other means to avoid
 blocking when no data (or space) is available.
 Please note that solaris event ports can deliver a lot of spurious
 notifications, so you need to use non-blocking I/O or other means to avoid
 blocking when no data (or space) is available.

+.Sp
+While this backend scales well, it requires one system call per active
+file descriptor per loop iteration. For small and medium numbers of file
+descriptors a \*(L"slow\*(R" \f(CW\*(C`EVBACKEND_SELECT\*(C'\fR or \f(CW\*(C`EVBACKEND_POLL\*(C'\fR backend
+might perform better.

 .ie n .IP """EVBACKEND_ALL""" 4
 .el .IP "\f(CWEVBACKEND_ALL\fR" 4
 .IX Item "EVBACKEND_ALL"
 Try all backends (even potentially broken ones that wouldn't be tried
 with \f(CW\*(C`EVFLAG_AUTO\*(C'\fR). Since this is a mask, you can do stuff such as
 \&\f(CW\*(C`EVBACKEND_ALL & ~EVBACKEND_KQUEUE\*(C'\fR.
 .ie n .IP """EVBACKEND_ALL""" 4
 .el .IP "\f(CWEVBACKEND_ALL\fR" 4
 .IX Item "EVBACKEND_ALL"
 Try all backends (even potentially broken ones that wouldn't be tried
 with \f(CW\*(C`EVFLAG_AUTO\*(C'\fR). Since this is a mask, you can do stuff such as
 \&\f(CW\*(C`EVBACKEND_ALL & ~EVBACKEND_KQUEUE\*(C'\fR.

+.Sp
+It is definitely not recommended to use this flag.

 .RE
 .RS 4
 .Sp
 .RE
 .RS 4
 .Sp


@@ -731,11 +769,11 @@ Example: For some weird reason, unregister the above signal handler again.
 \&  ev_ref (loop);
 \&  ev_signal_stop (loop, &exitsig);
 .Ve
 \&  ev_ref (loop);
 \&  ev_signal_stop (loop, &exitsig);
 .Ve

-.IP "ev_set_io_collect_interval (ev_tstamp interval)" 4
-.IX Item "ev_set_io_collect_interval (ev_tstamp interval)"
+.IP "ev_set_io_collect_interval (loop, ev_tstamp interval)" 4
+.IX Item "ev_set_io_collect_interval (loop, ev_tstamp interval)"

 .PD 0
 .PD 0

-.IP "ev_set_timeout_collect_interval (ev_tstamp interval)" 4
-.IX Item "ev_set_timeout_collect_interval (ev_tstamp interval)"
+.IP "ev_set_timeout_collect_interval (loop, ev_tstamp interval)" 4
+.IX Item "ev_set_timeout_collect_interval (loop, ev_tstamp interval)"

 .PD
 These advanced functions influence the time that libev will spend waiting
 for events. Both are by default \f(CW0\fR, meaning that libev will try to
 .PD
 These advanced functions influence the time that libev will spend waiting
 for events. Both are by default \f(CW0\fR, meaning that libev will try to


@@ -754,18 +792,20 @@ overhead for the actual polling but can deliver many events at once.
 By setting a higher \fIio collect interval\fR you allow libev to spend more
 time collecting I/O events, so you can handle more events per iteration,
 at the cost of increasing latency. Timeouts (both \f(CW\*(C`ev_periodic\*(C'\fR and
 By setting a higher \fIio collect interval\fR you allow libev to spend more
 time collecting I/O events, so you can handle more events per iteration,
 at the cost of increasing latency. Timeouts (both \f(CW\*(C`ev_periodic\*(C'\fR and

-\&\f(CW\*(C`ev_timer\*(C'\fR) will be not affected.
+\&\f(CW\*(C`ev_timer\*(C'\fR) will be not affected. Setting this to a non-null value will
+introduce an additional \f(CW\*(C`ev_sleep ()\*(C'\fR call into most loop iterations.

 .Sp
 Likewise, by setting a higher \fItimeout collect interval\fR you allow libev
 to spend more time collecting timeouts, at the expense of increased
 latency (the watcher callback will be called later). \f(CW\*(C`ev_io\*(C'\fR watchers
 .Sp
 Likewise, by setting a higher \fItimeout collect interval\fR you allow libev
 to spend more time collecting timeouts, at the expense of increased
 latency (the watcher callback will be called later). \f(CW\*(C`ev_io\*(C'\fR watchers

-will not be affected.
-.Sp
-Many programs can usually benefit by setting the io collect interval to
-a value near \f(CW0.1\fR or so, which is often enough for interactive servers
-(of course not for games), likewise for timeouts. It usually doesn't make
-much sense to set it to a lower value than \f(CW0.01\fR, as this approsaches
-the timing granularity of most systems.
+will not be affected. Setting this to a non-null value will not introduce
+any overhead in libev.
+.Sp
+Many (busy) programs can usually benefit by setting the io collect
+interval to a value near \f(CW0.1\fR or so, which is often enough for
+interactive servers (of course not for games), likewise for timeouts. It
+usually doesn't make much sense to set it to a lower value than \f(CW0.01\fR,
+as this approsaches the timing granularity of most systems.

 .SH "ANATOMY OF A WATCHER"
 .IX Header "ANATOMY OF A WATCHER"
 A watcher is a structure that you create and register to record your
 .SH "ANATOMY OF A WATCHER"
 .IX Header "ANATOMY OF A WATCHER"
 A watcher is a structure that you create and register to record your


@@ -1784,11 +1824,11 @@ It is recommended to give \f(CW\*(C`ev_check\*(C'\fR watchers highest (\f(CW\*(C
 priority, to ensure that they are being run before any other watchers
 after the poll. Also, \f(CW\*(C`ev_check\*(C'\fR watchers (and \f(CW\*(C`ev_prepare\*(C'\fR watchers,
 too) should not activate (\*(L"feed\*(R") events into libev. While libev fully
 priority, to ensure that they are being run before any other watchers
 after the poll. Also, \f(CW\*(C`ev_check\*(C'\fR watchers (and \f(CW\*(C`ev_prepare\*(C'\fR watchers,
 too) should not activate (\*(L"feed\*(R") events into libev. While libev fully

-supports this, they will be called before other \f(CW\*(C`ev_check\*(C'\fR watchers did
-their job. As \f(CW\*(C`ev_check\*(C'\fR watchers are often used to embed other event
-loops those other event loops might be in an unusable state until their
-\&\f(CW\*(C`ev_check\*(C'\fR watcher ran (always remind yourself to coexist peacefully with
-others).
+supports this, they will be called before other \f(CW\*(C`ev_check\*(C'\fR watchers
+did their job. As \f(CW\*(C`ev_check\*(C'\fR watchers are often used to embed other
+(non\-libev) event loops those other event loops might be in an unusable
+state until their \f(CW\*(C`ev_check\*(C'\fR watcher ran (always remind yourself to
+coexist peacefully with others).

 .PP
 \fIWatcher-Specific Functions and Data Members\fR
 .IX Subsection "Watcher-Specific Functions and Data Members"
 .PP
 \fIWatcher-Specific Functions and Data Members\fR
 .IX Subsection "Watcher-Specific Functions and Data Members"


@@ -1978,7 +2018,7 @@ this.
 This is a rather advanced watcher type that lets you embed one event loop
 into another (currently only \f(CW\*(C`ev_io\*(C'\fR events are supported in the embedded
 loop, other types of watchers might be handled in a delayed or incorrect
 This is a rather advanced watcher type that lets you embed one event loop
 into another (currently only \f(CW\*(C`ev_io\*(C'\fR events are supported in the embedded
 loop, other types of watchers might be handled in a delayed or incorrect

-fashion and must not be used). (See portability notes, below).
+fashion and must not be used).

 .PP
 There are primarily two reasons you would want that: work around bugs and
 prioritise I/O.
 .PP
 There are primarily two reasons you would want that: work around bugs and
 prioritise I/O.


@@ -2048,21 +2088,6 @@ create it, and if that fails, use the normal loop for everything:
 \&  else
 \&    loop_lo = loop_hi;
 .Ve
 \&  else
 \&    loop_lo = loop_hi;
 .Ve

-.Sh "Portability notes"
-.IX Subsection "Portability notes"
-Kqueue is nominally embeddable, but this is broken on all BSDs that I
-tried, in various ways. Usually the embedded event loop will simply never
-receive events, sometimes it will only trigger a few times, sometimes in a
-loop. Epoll is also nominally embeddable, but many Linux kernel versions
-will always eport the epoll fd as ready, even when no events are pending.
-.PP
-While libev allows embedding these backends (they are contained in
-\&\f(CW\*(C`ev_embeddable_backends ()\*(C'\fR), take extreme care that it will actually
-work.
-.PP
-When in doubt, create a dynamic event loop forced to use sockets (this
-usually works) and possibly another thread and a pipe or so to report to
-your main event loop.

 .PP
 \fIWatcher-Specific Functions and Data Members\fR
 .IX Subsection "Watcher-Specific Functions and Data Members"
 .PP
 \fIWatcher-Specific Functions and Data Members\fR
 .IX Subsection "Watcher-Specific Functions and Data Members"