Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 14 Feb 2003 17:08:08 -0800 (PST) | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Subject | Re: Synchronous signal delivery.. |
| |
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/
| |