# Re: \[PATCH v2 2/2\] epoll: introduce EPOLLEXCLUSIVE and EPOLLROUNDROBIN

- From: Ingo Molnar \<mingo@kernel.org\>
- Date: 2015-02-18 16:33:00 
- List: linux-api
- Page: https://ratatoskr.run/linux-api/2015/02/92651
- Thread: https://ratatoskr.run/linux-fsdevel/2015/02/92645/t.md

```text

* Jason Baron [ref] wrote:

> > This has two main advantages: firstly it solves the 
> > O(N) (micro-)problem, but it also more evenly 
> > distributes events both between task-lists and within 
> > epoll groups as tasks as well.
> 
> Its solving 2 issues - spurious wakeups, and more even 
> loading of threads. The event distribution is more even 
> between 'epoll groups' with this patch, however, if 
> multiple threads are blocking on a single 'epoll group', 
> this patch does not affect the the event distribution 
> there. [...]

Regarding your last point, are you sure about that?

If we have say 16 epoll threads registered, and if the list 
is static (no register/unregister activity), then the 
wakeup pattern is in strict order of the list: threads 
closer to the list head will be woken more frequently, in a 
wake-once fashion. So if threads do just quick work and go 
back to sleep quickly, then typically only the first 2-3 
threads will get any runtime in practice - the wakeup 
iteration never gets 'deep' into the list.

With the round-robin shuffling of the list, the threads get 
shuffled to the tail on wakeup, which distributes events 
evenly: all 16 epoll threads will accumulate an even 
distribution of runtime, statistically.

Have I misunderstood this somehow?

Thanks,

	Ingo
```