X-Git-Url: https://git.llucax.com/software/libev.git/blobdiff_plain/db2ba1d67df543c8e0dbfc578005b065983bdc94..b8c777a92811264bac910c90e3daa0990882d4ec:/ev.3?ds=sidebyside diff --git a/ev.3 b/ev.3 index 7689fc0..2129dc3 100644 --- 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. -.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. @@ -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 -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)" -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)" @@ -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 -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 @@ -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. +.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 -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 +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 -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)" -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)" @@ -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. +.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. +.Sp +It is definitely not recommended to use this flag. .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 -.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 -.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 @@ -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 -\&\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 -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 @@ -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 -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" @@ -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 -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. @@ -2048,21 +2088,6 @@ create it, and if that fails, use the normal loop for everything: \& 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"