Manfred Spraul schrieb:
>
> Peter Waechtler wrote:
>
> >I plan to separate the interfaces and just share the message stuff.
> >But time was getting short. :)
> >
>
> Ok, you plan to rewrite the patch entirely, and what you have posted is
> a placeholder.
>
> How would the result look like?
> I'm thinking about
> - real syscalls
> - pipefs like filesystem stub, kern-only mounted, not visible for normal
> fs operations.
> - not using the sysv array
>
> Could you check the sus standard if that is permitted? A child would
> inherit the mqueue on fork().
>
Yes, I will check that - but I'm afraid of submitting too late.. :(
> For the locking stuff, the patch should probably depend on the sysv rcu
> patch, it cleans up locking a bit.
>
BTW, please have a look at ipc/util.c - the spinlock is held once
ipc_addid() is called and will deadlock when the array has to grow...
-
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 : Thu Oct 31 2002 - 22:00:36 EST