Re: possible selrecord optimization ?

On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 02:29:56PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 9:25:27 pm Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> > Looking at how selrecord() / selwakeup() and their Linux counterparts
> > poll_wait() and wake_up() are used, i noticed the following:
....
> > I wonder if we could use the same optimization as Linux:
> > as soon as pollscan/selscan detects a non-blocking fd,
> > make selrecord a no-op (which is probably as simple
> > as setting SELTD_RESCAN; and since it only goes up
> > we do not need to lock to check it).
> 
> Yes, I think this would work fine.  I think setting SELTD_RESCAN as a way to 
> do it is fine as well.

excellent, thanks.

I also have two related questions:

1. why isn't the struct mtx part of the struct selinfo instead
   of being grabbed from the mtxpool_select ?

2. am i correct that we do need to protect concurrent invocations
   of selrecord() on the same selinfo because mtx_pool_find()
   return the same mutex for a given struct selinfo ?

In case, any objections if i add some comments to the code
to explain the above ?

cheers
luigi