On 13/03/2015 21:32, Michael Conrad wrote:
I stand corrected. I thought there would be a partial write if the pipe was mostly full, but indeed, it blocks.
Except you have to make the writes blocking, which severely limits what the writers can do - no asynchronous event loop. For a simple "cat"-equivalent between the netlink and a fifo, it's enough, but it's about all it's good for. And such a "cat"-equivalent is still useless. It's still a very bad idea to allow writes from different sources into a single fifo when there's only one authoritative source of data, in this case the netlink. If a process wants to read uevents from a pipe, it can simply read from an anonymous pipe, being spawned by the netlink listener. That's what my s6-uevent-listener and Natanael's nldev do, and I agree with you: there's simply no need to introduce fifos into the picture. -- Laurent _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list busybox@busybox.net http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
