[cgl_discussion] Re: AEM - FAQ

Frederic Rossi (LMC) Frederic.Rossi at ericsson.ca
Thu Mar 13 19:12:47 PST 2003

Thanks for the suggestions.

The API is documented in the requirement
document (and some old documents).
But I can extract it and put it on the web site too
althoug it will change soon.

Regarding libevent (and I guess this is true for liboop or
glib), although I've heard good things about it, I cannot see 
how a generic event loop can be more efficient than handling 
events directly from the notifications using a custom
architecture (using AIO for example). So it doesn't
solve the problem. This kind of user space architecture is 
exactly what we want to avoid.
I didn't compare because they really don't fall into the 
same kind of tool. 


----- Original Message -----
From: "Randy.Dunlap" <rddunlap at osdl.org>
To: "Frederic Rossi (LMC)" <Frederic.Rossi at ericsson.ca>
Cc: <cgl_discussion at osdl.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 4:17 PM
Subject: Re: AEM - FAQ

> On Thu, 13 Mar 2003 14:48:52 -0500 "Frederic Rossi (LMC)"
<Frederic.Rossi at ericsson.ca> wrote:
> | Hi,
> |
> | I joined a document which explains what is AEM. It is actually a FAQ
> | document I will put on the web site, based on questions I've received.
> |
> | I hope it will clarify what is AEM compared to epoll in particular. Let
> | me know if you wanted something different because I would like
> | to re-use some part of it for the requirement document.
> |
> | Should have any question, please feel free to ask me.
> I would put the last section (target applications) nearer the beginning.
> It adds some helpful insight.
> Are all of the new syscalls documented anywhere?  (other that the
> source code)
> And have you looked at (compared) AEM with libevent?
> <http://monkey.org/~provos/libevent/>
> --
> ~Randy

More information about the cgl_discussion mailing list