[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <076F1B35-BE08-41B4-8294-581EDAFF4ACC@mac.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2007 23:32:17 -0700
From: Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@....com>
To: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, herbert.xu@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hch@...radead.org,
arjan@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] [RFC] AF_RXRPC socket family implementation [try #2]
On Mar 16, 2007, at 10:11:41, Alan Cox wrote:
>> I know what they are; and I don't think that what's available
>> covers it.
>>
>>> and use a proper standard socket type.
>>
>> Assuming that that list is exhaustive...
>
> SOCK_RDM seems to match perfectly well here. The point isn't to
> enumerate everything in the universe the point is to find "works
> like" parallels good enough to avoid more special casing.
IMHO the problem with classifying RxRPC as a "reliable datagram"
socket is that even an atomic unidirectional communication isn't a
single datagram, it's at least 3; there is shared connection state
and security context on both sides which pertains to a collection of
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.
Cheers,
Kyle Moffett
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists