RE: WaitForMultipleObjects/etc. In Kernel

[Network Nut]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Clemens Ladisch [mailto:clemens@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, January 31, 2014 4:54 PM
> To: Network Nut
> Cc: 'Austin S. Hemmelgarn'; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: WaitForMultipleObjects/etc. In Kernel
> 
> Network Nut wrote:
> >> Assuming that you're porting to mainline distributions (and not
> >> embedded devices), named SHM segments are accessible (providing the
> >> accessing process has correct permissions) under /dev/shm.  You just
> >> need to make sure that you create the segment with the right
> >> permissions for the other processes to access it.
> >
> > I already know how to do named shared memory between two processes.
> I only included that to describe my overall problem.
> >
> > The problem that I am having is how I can make three totally-independent
> processes interact:
> >
> > 1. M is a master process that creates a semaphore.
> > 2. P1 is a process that operates against the semaphore.
> > 3. P2 is a process that operates against the semaphore.
> > 4. It is not permissible that M be responsible for launching P1 or P2.
> > 5.  The semaphore, one way or another, must allow itself to be
> > specified as one of the synchronization primitives in epoll_wait()
> 
> This general problem descripton does not say anything more than your first
> mail.
> 
> Use eventfd.  To share it, use a Unix domain socket created by M.  (This
> socket must be created at a well-known path.  shm_open() works similarly,
> but that it creates a file in a RAM disk and mmap()s it is just an
> implementation detail.)

How do I create the socket at "well-known path"?

Regards,

-Nut

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/