netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: kernel bug in socketpair()

To: Glenn Fowler <gsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: kernel bug in socketpair()
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 12:04:57 -0700
Cc: gsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, dgk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <200307231854.OAA90112@raptor.research.att.com>
References: <200307231428.KAA15254@raptor.research.att.com> <20030723074615.25eea776.davem@redhat.com> <200307231656.MAA69129@raptor.research.att.com> <20030723100043.18d5b025.davem@redhat.com> <200307231724.NAA90957@raptor.research.att.com> <20030723103135.3eac4cd2.davem@redhat.com> <200307231814.OAA74344@raptor.research.att.com> <20030723112307.5b8ae55c.davem@redhat.com> <200307231854.OAA90112@raptor.research.att.com>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Wed, 23 Jul 2003 14:54:49 -0400 (EDT)
Glenn Fowler <gsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Wed, 23 Jul 2003 11:23:07 -0700 David S. Miller wrote:
> > On Wed, 23 Jul 2003 14:14:57 -0400 (EDT)
> > Glenn Fowler <gsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > > named sockets seem a little heavyweight for this application
> 
> > I think it'll be cheaper than unnamed unix sockets and
> > groveling in /proc/*/fd/
> 
> > And even if there is a minor performance issue, you'll more than get
> > that back due to the portability gain. :-)
> 
> named unix sockets reside in the fs namespace, no?

Right.

> so they must be linked to a dir before use and unlinked after use
> the unlink after use would be particularly tricky for the parent process
> implementing
>       cmd <(cmd ...) ...

Hmmm... true.

I honestly don't know what to suggest you use, sorry :(

Is bash totally broken because of all this?  Or does the problem only
trigger when using (cmd) subprocesses in a certain way?

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>