[ViewVC] Diff of: cvs/libev/ev.pod

Comparing libev/ev.pod (file contents):
Revision 1.235 by root, Thu Apr 16 07:50:39 2009 UTC vs.
Revision 1.256 by root, Tue Jul 14 20:31:21 2009 UTC

      // unloop was called, so exit
      return 0;
    }
-=head1 DESCRIPTION
+=head1 ABOUT THIS DOCUMENT
+This document documents the libev software package.
 The newest version of this document is also available as an html-formatted
 web page you might find easier to navigate when reading it for the first
 time: L<http://pod.tst.eu/http://cvs.schmorp.de/libev/ev.pod>.
+While this document tries to be as complete as possible in documenting
+libev, its usage and the rationale behind its design, it is not a tutorial
+on event-based programming, nor will it introduce event-based programming
+with libev.
+Familarity with event based programming techniques in general is assumed
+throughout this document.
+=head1 ABOUT LIBEV
 Libev is an event loop: you register interest in certain events (such as a
 file descriptor being readable or a timeout occurring), and it will manage
 these event sources and provide your program with events.
 name C<loop> (which is always of type C<ev_loop *>) will not have
 this argument.
 =head2 TIME REPRESENTATION
-Libev represents time as a single floating point number, representing the
+Libev represents time as a single floating point number, representing
-(fractional) number of seconds since the (POSIX) epoch (somewhere near
+the (fractional) number of seconds since the (POSIX) epoch (somewhere
-the beginning of 1970, details are complicated, don't ask). This type is
+near the beginning of 1970, details are complicated, don't ask). This
-called C<ev_tstamp>, which is what you should use too. It usually aliases
+type is called C<ev_tstamp>, which is what you should use too. It usually
-to the C<double> type in C, and when you need to do any calculations on
+aliases to the C<double> type in C. When you need to do any calculations
-it, you should treat it as some floating point value. Unlike the name
+on it, you should treat it as some floating point value. Unlike the name
 component C<stamp> might indicate, it is also used for time differences
 throughout libev.
 =head1 ERROR HANDLING
 This value can sometimes be useful as a generation counter of sorts (it
 "ticks" the number of loop iterations), as it roughly corresponds with
 C<ev_prepare> and C<ev_check> calls.
+=item unsigned int ev_loop_depth (loop)
+Returns the number of times C<ev_loop> was entered minus the number of
+times C<ev_loop> was exited, in other words, the recursion depth.
+Outside C<ev_loop>, this number is zero. In a callback, this number is
+C<1>, unless C<ev_loop> was invoked recursively (or from another thread),
+in which case it is higher.
+Leaving C<ev_loop> abnormally (setjmp/longjmp, cancelling the thread
+etc.), doesn't count as exit.
 =item unsigned int ev_backend (loop)
 Returns one of the C<EVBACKEND_*> flags indicating the event backend in
 use.
 This function is rarely useful, but when some event callback runs for a
 very long time without entering the event loop, updating libev's idea of
 the current time is a good idea.
-See also "The special problem of time updates" in the C<ev_timer> section.
+See also L<The special problem of time updates> in the C<ev_timer> section.
 =item ev_suspend (loop)
 =item ev_resume (loop)
 By setting a higher I<io collect interval> 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 C<ev_periodic> and
 C<ev_timer>) will be not affected. Setting this to a non-null value will
-introduce an additional C<ev_sleep ()> call into most loop iterations.
+introduce an additional C<ev_sleep ()> call into most loop iterations. The
+sleep time ensures that libev will not poll for I/O events more often then
+once per this interval, on average.
 Likewise, by setting a higher I<timeout collect interval> you allow libev
 to spend more time collecting timeouts, at the expense of increased
 latency/jitter/inexactness (the watcher callback will be called
 later). C<ev_io> watchers will not be affected. Setting this to a non-null
 Many (busy) programs can usually benefit by setting the I/O collect
 interval to a value near C<0.1> 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 C<0.01>,
-as this approaches the timing granularity of most systems.
+as this approaches the timing granularity of most systems. Note that if
+you do transactions with the outside world and you can't increase the
+parallelity, then this setting will limit your transaction rate (if you
+need to poll once per transaction and the I/O collect interval is 0.01,
+then you can't do more than 100 transations per second).
 Setting the I<timeout collect interval> can improve the opportunity for
 saving power, as the program will "bundle" timer callback invocations that
 are "near" in time together, by delaying some, thus reducing the number of
 times the process sleeps and wakes up again. Another useful technique to
 reduce iterations/wake-ups is to use C<ev_periodic> watchers and make sure
 they fire on, say, one-second boundaries only.
+Example: we only need 0.1s timeout granularity, and we wish not to poll
+more often than 100 times per second:
+   ev_set_timeout_collect_interval (EV_DEFAULT_UC_ 0.1);
+   ev_set_io_collect_interval (EV_DEFAULT_UC_ 0.01);
+=item ev_invoke_pending (loop)
+This call will simply invoke all pending watchers while resetting their
+pending state. Normally, C<ev_loop> does this automatically when required,
+but when overriding the invoke callback this call comes handy.
+=item int ev_pending_count (loop)
+Returns the number of pending watchers - zero indicates that no watchers
+are pending.
+=item ev_set_invoke_pending_cb (loop, void (*invoke_pending_cb)(EV_P))
+This overrides the invoke pending functionality of the loop: Instead of
+invoking all pending watchers when there are any, C<ev_loop> will call
+this callback instead. This is useful, for example, when you want to
+invoke the actual watchers inside another context (another thread etc.).
+If you want to reset the callback, use C<ev_invoke_pending> as new
+callback.
+=item ev_set_loop_release_cb (loop, void (*release)(EV_P), void (*acquire)(EV_P))
+Sometimes you want to share the same loop between multiple threads. This
+can be done relatively simply by putting mutex_lock/unlock calls around
+each call to a libev function.
+However, C<ev_loop> can run an indefinite time, so it is not feasible to
+wait for it to return. One way around this is to wake up the loop via
+C<ev_unloop> and C<av_async_send>, another way is to set these I<release>
+and I<acquire> callbacks on the loop.
+When set, then C<release> will be called just before the thread is
+suspended waiting for new events, and C<acquire> is called just
+afterwards.
+Ideally, C<release> will just call your mutex_unlock function, and
+C<acquire> will just call the mutex_lock function again.
+While event loop modifications are allowed between invocations of
+C<release> and C<acquire> (that's their only purpose after all), no
+modifications done will affect the event loop, i.e. adding watchers will
+have no effect on the set of file descriptors being watched, or the time
+waited. USe an C<ev_async> watcher to wake up C<ev_loop> when you want it
+to take note of any changes you made.
+In theory, threads executing C<ev_loop> will be async-cancel safe between
+invocations of C<release> and C<acquire>.
+See also the locking example in the C<THREADS> section later in this
+document.
+=item ev_set_userdata (loop, void *data)
+=item ev_userdata (loop)
+Set and retrieve a single C<void *> associated with a loop. When
+C<ev_set_userdata> has never been called, then C<ev_userdata> returns
+C<0.>
+These two functions can be used to associate arbitrary data with a loop,
+and are intended solely for the C<invoke_pending_cb>, C<release> and
+C<acquire> callbacks described above, but of course can be (ab-)used for
+any other purpose as well.
 =item ev_loop_verify (loop)
 This function only does something when C<EV_VERIFY> support has been
 compiled in, which is the default for non-minimal builds. It tries to go
    #include <stddef.h>
    static void
    t1_cb (EV_P_ ev_timer *w, int revents)
    {
-     struct my_biggy big = (struct my_biggy *
+     struct my_biggy big = (struct my_biggy *)
        (((char *)w) - offsetof (struct my_biggy, t1));
    }
    static void
    t2_cb (EV_P_ ev_timer *w, int revents)
    {
-     struct my_biggy big = (struct my_biggy *
+     struct my_biggy big = (struct my_biggy *)
        (((char *)w) - offsetof (struct my_biggy, t2));
    }
 =head2 WATCHER PRIORITY MODELS
      // with the default priority are receiving events.
      ev_idle_start (EV_A_ &idle);
    }
    static void
-   idle-cb (EV_P_ ev_idle *w, int revents)
+   idle_cb (EV_P_ ev_idle *w, int revents)
    {
      // actual processing
      read (STDIN_FILENO, ...);
      // have to start the I/O watcher again, as
 descriptors to non-blocking mode is also usually a good idea (but not
 required if you know what you are doing).
 If you cannot use non-blocking mode, then force the use of a
 known-to-be-good backend (at the time of this writing, this includes only
-C<EVBACKEND_SELECT> and C<EVBACKEND_POLL>).
+C<EVBACKEND_SELECT> and C<EVBACKEND_POLL>). The same applies to file
+descriptors for which non-blocking operation makes no sense (such as
+files) - libev doesn't guarentee any specific behaviour in that case.
 Another thing you have to watch out for is that it is quite easy to
 receive "spurious" readiness notifications, that is your callback might
 be called with C<EV_READ> but a subsequent C<read>(2) will actually block
 because there is no data. Not only are some backends known to create a
 year, it will still time out after (roughly) one hour. "Roughly" because
 detecting time jumps is hard, and some inaccuracies are unavoidable (the
 monotonic clock option helps a lot here).
 The callback is guaranteed to be invoked only I<after> its timeout has
-passed. If multiple timers become ready during the same loop iteration
+passed (not I<at>, so on systems with very low-resolution clocks this
-then the ones with earlier time-out values are invoked before ones with
+might introduce a small delay). If multiple timers become ready during the
-later time-out values (but this is no longer true when a callback calls
+same loop iteration then the ones with earlier time-out values are invoked
-C<ev_loop> recursively).
+before ones of the same priority with later time-out values (but this is
+no longer true when a callback calls C<ev_loop> recursively).
 =head3 Be smart about timeouts
 Many real-world problems involve some kind of timeout, usually for error
 recovery. A typical example is an HTTP request - if the other side hangs,
 C<after> argument to C<ev_timer_set>, and only ever use the C<repeat>
 member and C<ev_timer_again>.
 At start:
-   ev_timer_init (timer, callback);
+   ev_init (timer, callback);
    timer->repeat = 60.;
    ev_timer_again (loop, timer);
 Each time there is some activity:
 To start the timer, simply initialise the watcher and set C<last_activity>
 to the current time (meaning we just have some activity :), then call the
 callback, which will "do the right thing" and start the timer:
-   ev_timer_init (timer, callback);
+   ev_init (timer, callback);
    last_activity = ev_now (loop);
    callback (loop, timer, EV_TIMEOUT);
 And when there is some activity, simply store the current time in
 C<last_activity>, no libev calls at all:
 some child status changes (most typically when a child of yours dies or
 exits). It is permissible to install a child watcher I<after> the child
 has been forked (which implies it might have already exited), as long
 as the event loop isn't entered (or is continued from a watcher), i.e.,
 forking and then immediately registering a watcher for the child is fine,
-but forking and registering a watcher a few event loop iterations later is
+but forking and registering a watcher a few event loop iterations later or
-not.
+in the next callback invocation is not.
 Only the default event loop is capable of handling signals, and therefore
 you can only register child watchers in the default event loop.
+Due to some design glitches inside libev, child watchers will always be
+handled at maximum priority (their priority is set to C<EV_MAXPRI> by
+libev)
 =head3 Process Interaction
 Libev grabs C<SIGCHLD> as soon as the default event loop is
 initialised. This is necessary to guarantee proper behaviour even if
      // no longer anything immediate to do.
    }
    ev_idle *idle_watcher = malloc (sizeof (ev_idle));
    ev_idle_init (idle_watcher, idle_cb);
-   ev_idle_start (loop, idle_cb);
+   ev_idle_start (loop, idle_watcher);
 =head2 C<ev_prepare> and C<ev_check> - customise your event loop!
 Prepare and check watchers are usually (but not always) used in pairs:
      struct pollfd fds [nfd];
      // actual code will need to loop here and realloc etc.
      adns_beforepoll (ads, fds, &nfd, &timeout, timeval_from (ev_time ()));
      /* the callback is illegal, but won't be called as we stop during check */
-     ev_timer_init (&tw, 0, timeout * 1e-3);
+     ev_timer_init (&tw, 0, timeout * 1e-3, 0.);
      ev_timer_start (loop, &tw);
      // create one ev_io per pollfd
      for (int i = 0; i < nfd; ++i)
        {
 event loop blocks next and before C<ev_check> watchers are being called,
 and only in the child after the fork. If whoever good citizen calling
 C<ev_default_fork> cheats and calls it in the wrong process, the fork
 handlers will be invoked, too, of course.
+=head3 The special problem of life after fork - how is it possible?
+Most uses of C<fork()> consist of forking, then some simple calls to ste
+up/change the process environment, followed by a call to C<exec()>. This
+sequence should be handled by libev without any problems.
+This changes when the application actually wants to do event handling
+in the child, or both parent in child, in effect "continuing" after the
+fork.
+The default mode of operation (for libev, with application help to detect
+forks) is to duplicate all the state in the child, as would be expected
+when I<either> the parent I<or> the child process continues.
+When both processes want to continue using libev, then this is usually the
+wrong result. In that case, usually one process (typically the parent) is
+supposed to continue with all watchers in place as before, while the other
+process typically wants to start fresh, i.e. without any active watchers.
+The cleanest and most efficient way to achieve that with libev is to
+simply create a new event loop, which of course will be "empty", and
+use that for new watchers. This has the advantage of not touching more
+memory than necessary, and thus avoiding the copy-on-write, and the
+disadvantage of having to use multiple event loops (which do not support
+signal watchers).
+When this is not possible, or you want to use the default loop for
+other reasons, then in the process that wants to start "fresh", call
+C<ev_default_destroy ()> followed by C<ev_default_loop (...)>. Destroying
+the default loop will "orphan" (not stop) all registered watchers, so you
+have to be careful not to execute code that modifies those watchers. Note
+also that in that case, you have to re-register any signal watchers.
 =head3 Watcher-Specific Functions and Data Members
 =over 4
 =item ev_fork_init (ev_signal *, callback)
 defined to be C<0>, then they are not.
 =item EV_MINIMAL
 If you need to shave off some kilobytes of code at the expense of some
-speed, define this symbol to C<1>. Currently this is used to override some
+speed (but with the full API), define this symbol to C<1>. Currently this
-inlining decisions, saves roughly 30% code size on amd64. It also selects a
+is used to override some inlining decisions, saves roughly 30% code size
-much smaller 2-heap for timer management over the default 4-heap.
+on amd64. It also selects a much smaller 2-heap for timer management over
+the default 4-heap.
+You can save even more by disabling watcher types you do not need
+and setting C<EV_MAXPRI> == C<EV_MINPRI>. Also, disabling C<assert>
+(C<-DNDEBUG>) will usually reduce code size a lot.
+Defining C<EV_MINIMAL> to C<2> will additionally reduce the core API to
+provide a bare-bones event library. See C<ev.h> for details on what parts
+of the API are still available, and do not complain if this subset changes
+over time.
 =item EV_PID_HASHSIZE
 C<ev_child> watchers use a small hash table to distribute workload by
 pid. The default size is C<16> (or C<1> with C<EV_MINIMAL>), usually more
 default loop and triggering an C<ev_async> watcher from the default loop
 watcher callback into the event loop interested in the signal.
 =back
+=head4 THREAD LOCKING EXAMPLE
+Here is a fictitious example of how to run an event loop in a different
+thread than where callbacks are being invoked and watchers are
+created/added/removed.
+For a real-world example, see the C<EV::Loop::Async> perl module,
+which uses exactly this technique (which is suited for many high-level
+languages).
+The example uses a pthread mutex to protect the loop data, a condition
+variable to wait for callback invocations, an async watcher to notify the
+event loop thread and an unspecified mechanism to wake up the main thread.
+First, you need to associate some data with the event loop:
+   typedef struct {
+     mutex_t lock; /* global loop lock */
+     ev_async async_w;
+     thread_t tid;
+     cond_t invoke_cv;
+   } userdata;
+   void prepare_loop (EV_P)
+   {
+      // for simplicity, we use a static userdata struct.
+      static userdata u;
+      ev_async_init (&u->async_w, async_cb);
+      ev_async_start (EV_A_ &u->async_w);
+      pthread_mutex_init (&u->lock, 0);
+      pthread_cond_init (&u->invoke_cv, 0);
+      // now associate this with the loop
+      ev_set_userdata (EV_A_ u);
+      ev_set_invoke_pending_cb (EV_A_ l_invoke);
+      ev_set_loop_release_cb (EV_A_ l_release, l_acquire);
+      // then create the thread running ev_loop
+      pthread_create (&u->tid, 0, l_run, EV_A);
+   }
+The callback for the C<ev_async> watcher does nothing: the watcher is used
+solely to wake up the event loop so it takes notice of any new watchers
+that might have been added:
+   static void
+   async_cb (EV_P_ ev_async *w, int revents)
+   {
+      // just used for the side effects
+   }
+The C<l_release> and C<l_acquire> callbacks simply unlock/lock the mutex
+protecting the loop data, respectively.
+   static void
+   l_release (EV_P)
+   {
+     userdata *u = ev_userdata (EV_A);
+     pthread_mutex_unlock (&u->lock);
+   }
+   static void
+   l_acquire (EV_P)
+   {
+     userdata *u = ev_userdata (EV_A);
+     pthread_mutex_lock (&u->lock);
+   }
+The event loop thread first acquires the mutex, and then jumps straight
+into C<ev_loop>:
+   void *
+   l_run (void *thr_arg)
+   {
+     struct ev_loop *loop = (struct ev_loop *)thr_arg;
+     l_acquire (EV_A);
+     pthread_setcanceltype (PTHREAD_CANCEL_ASYNCHRONOUS, 0);
+     ev_loop (EV_A_ 0);
+     l_release (EV_A);
+     return 0;
+   }
+Instead of invoking all pending watchers, the C<l_invoke> callback will
+signal the main thread via some unspecified mechanism (signals? pipe
+writes? C<Async::Interrupt>?) and then waits until all pending watchers
+have been called (in a while loop because a) spurious wakeups are possible
+and b) skipping inter-thread-communication when there are no pending
+watchers is very beneficial):
+   static void
+   l_invoke (EV_P)
+   {
+     userdata *u = ev_userdata (EV_A);
+     while (ev_pending_count (EV_A))
+       {
+         wake_up_other_thread_in_some_magic_or_not_so_magic_way ();
+         pthread_cond_wait (&u->invoke_cv, &u->lock);
+       }
+   }
+Now, whenever the main thread gets told to invoke pending watchers, it
+will grab the lock, call C<ev_invoke_pending> and then signal the loop
+thread to continue:
+   static void
+   real_invoke_pending (EV_P)
+   {
+     userdata *u = ev_userdata (EV_A);
+     pthread_mutex_lock (&u->lock);
+     ev_invoke_pending (EV_A);
+     pthread_cond_signal (&u->invoke_cv);
+     pthread_mutex_unlock (&u->lock);
+   }
+Whenever you want to start/stop a watcher or do other modifications to an
+event loop, you will now have to lock:
+   ev_timer timeout_watcher;
+   userdata *u = ev_userdata (EV_A);
+   ev_timer_init (&timeout_watcher, timeout_cb, 5.5, 0.);
+   pthread_mutex_lock (&u->lock);
+   ev_timer_start (EV_A_ &timeout_watcher);
+   ev_async_send (EV_A_ &u->async_w);
+   pthread_mutex_unlock (&u->lock);
+Note that sending the C<ev_async> watcher is required because otherwise
+an event loop currently blocking in the kernel will have no knowledge
+about the newly added timer. By waking up the loop it will pick up any new
+watchers in the next event loop iteration.
 =head3 COROUTINES
 Libev is very accommodating to coroutines ("cooperative threads"):
 libev fully supports nesting calls to its functions from different
 coroutines (e.g. you can call C<ev_loop> on the same loop from two
-different coroutines, and switch freely between both coroutines running the
+different coroutines, and switch freely between both coroutines running
-loop, as long as you don't confuse yourself). The only exception is that
+the loop, as long as you don't confuse yourself). The only exception is
-you must not do this from C<ev_periodic> reschedule callbacks.
+that you must not do this from C<ev_periodic> reschedule callbacks.
 Care has been taken to ensure that libev does not keep local state inside
 C<ev_loop>, and other calls do not usually allow for coroutine switches as
 they do not call any callbacks.
 way (note also that glib is the slowest event library known to man).
 There is no supported compilation method available on windows except
 embedding it into other applications.
+Sensible signal handling is officially unsupported by Microsoft - libev
+tries its best, but under most conditions, signals will simply not work.
 Not a libev limitation but worth mentioning: windows apparently doesn't
 accept large writes: instead of resulting in a partial write, windows will
 either accept everything or return C<ENOBUFS> if the buffer is too large,
 so make sure you only write small amounts into your sockets (less than a
 megabyte seems safe, but this apparently depends on the amount of memory
 the abysmal performance of winsockets, using a large number of sockets
 is not recommended (and not reasonable). If your program needs to use
 more than a hundred or so sockets, then likely it needs to use a totally
 different implementation for windows, as libev offers the POSIX readiness
 notification model, which cannot be implemented efficiently on windows
-(Microsoft monopoly games).
+(due to Microsoft monopoly games).
 A typical way to use libev under windows is to embed it (see the embedding
 section for details) and use the following F<evwrap.h> header file instead
 of F<ev.h>:
 Early versions of winsocket's select only supported waiting for a maximum
 of C<64> handles (probably owning to the fact that all windows kernels
 can only wait for C<64> things at the same time internally; Microsoft
 recommends spawning a chain of threads and wait for 63 handles and the
-previous thread in each. Great).
+previous thread in each. Sounds great!).
 Newer versions support more handles, but you need to define C<FD_SETSIZE>
 to some high number (e.g. C<2048>) before compiling the winsocket select
-call (which might be in libev or elsewhere, for example, perl does its own
+call (which might be in libev or elsewhere, for example, perl and many
-select emulation on windows).
+other interpreters do their own select emulation on windows).
 Another limit is the number of file descriptors in the Microsoft runtime
-libraries, which by default is C<64> (there must be a hidden I<64> fetish
+libraries, which by default is C<64> (there must be a hidden I<64>
-or something like this inside Microsoft). You can increase this by calling
+fetish or something like this inside Microsoft). You can increase this
-C<_setmaxstdio>, which can increase this limit to C<2048> (another
+by calling C<_setmaxstdio>, which can increase this limit to C<2048>
-arbitrary limit), but is broken in many versions of the Microsoft runtime
+(another arbitrary limit), but is broken in many versions of the Microsoft
-libraries.
-This might get you to about C<512> or C<2048> sockets (depending on
+runtime libraries. This might get you to about C<512> or C<2048> sockets
-windows version and/or the phase of the moon). To get more, you need to
+(depending on windows version and/or the phase of the moon). To get more,
-wrap all I/O functions and provide your own fd management, but the cost of
+you need to wrap all I/O functions and provide your own fd management, but
-calling select (O(n²)) will likely make this unworkable.
+the cost of calling select (O(n²)) will likely make this unworkable.
 =back
 =head2 PORTABILITY REQUIREMENTS
 =item C<double> must hold a time value in seconds with enough accuracy
 The type C<double> is used to represent timestamps. It is required to
 have at least 51 bits of mantissa (and 9 bits of exponent), which is good
 enough for at least into the year 4000. This requirement is fulfilled by
-implementations implementing IEEE 754 (basically all existing ones).
+implementations implementing IEEE 754, which is basically all existing
+ones. With IEEE 754 doubles, you get microsecond accuracy until at least
+2200.
 =back
 If you know of other additional requirements drop me a note.

Diff Legend

-–
+Removed lines
-+
+Added lines
-<
+Changed lines
->
+Changed lines

Comparing libev/ev.pod (file contents): Revision 1.235 by root, Thu Apr 16 07:50:39 2009 UTC vs. Revision 1.256 by root, Tue Jul 14 20:31:21 2009 UTC

Diff Legend

Comparing libev/ev.pod (file contents):
Revision 1.235 by root, Thu Apr 16 07:50:39 2009 UTC vs.
Revision 1.256 by root, Tue Jul 14 20:31:21 2009 UTC