On Sat, 15 Feb 2003, Matti Aarnio wrote:
>
> Somehow all this idea has a feeling of long established
> Linux kernel facility called: netlink
Several people have said that, and it's completely NOT TRUE.
The thing about sigfd() has _nothing_ to do with sending packets, and
everything to do with the fact that you _associate_ signals with the thing
that you get the packets from.
Sure, the code could associate signals with a netlink fd instead. But
netlink is not actually a very good abstraction in my opinion - it has
another layer of code (the network layer) between it and the user, which
dos not add any value.
> Do we need new syscall(s) ? Could it all be done with netlink ?
We'd need the same new system call - the one to associate signals of this
process with the netlink thing.
(Yeah, the "system call" could be an ioctl entry, but quite frankly,
that's much WORSE than adding a system call. It's just system calls
without type checking).
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Feb 15 2003 - 22:01:00 EST