Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 19 Mar 2007 13:04:28 +0000 | From | Alan Cox <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/5] [RFC] AF_RXRPC socket family implementation [try #2] |
| |
> message transmission. You yourself defined RDM to be a datagram service. > RxRPC is not, in my opinion, a datagram service, and neither is it a stream > service.
Message is what I should have said.
> Interestingly, searching for SOCK_RDM definitions with google shows there's > some disagreement as to what it represents. Some seem to thing it's connection > oriented and some that it's connectionless, and some seem to think it's > ordered, and some not.
Which is just fine, does it need to be one or the other. SOCK_DGRAM an be both connection oriented or connectionless.
> > > > independent and possibly simultaneous RxRPC calls. From the digging > > > around that I did in the kernel socket code a while ago I don't see a > > > cleaner way of implementing it than a new SOCK_RXRPC. > > Well, I suggest SOCK_RPC, not SOCK_RXRPC. There's no particular reason such a > flow type has to be limited to RxRPC.
Other RPC types use normal socket types.
> I'd say that that precludes applicability on two points: firstly, RxRPC is not > a datagram layer by the definition I provided in a previous email; and > secondly, RxRPC *does* provide some ordering guarantees.
So you want SOCK_SEQPACKET perhaps then ?
> > What does AIX do out of interest ? > > I've no way to find out what AIX does, but I suspect it simply doesn't.
Perhaps someone with AIX boxes around (say @ibm.com) could answer ? - 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/
| |