Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 13 Feb 2003 22:41:24 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 13 Feb 2003 22:41:24 -0500 Received: from sccrmhc01.attbi.com ([204.127.202.61]:65471 "EHLO sccrmhc01.attbi.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 13 Feb 2003 22:41:23 -0500 Subject: Re: Synchronous signal delivery.. From: Keith Adamson To: Keith Adamson Cc: Jamie Lokier , Kernel Mailing List In-Reply-To: <1045192268.14703.20.camel@x1-6-00-d0-70-00-74-d1> References: <20030214024046.GA18214@bjl1.jlokier.co.uk> <1045192268.14703.20.camel@x1-6-00-d0-70-00-74-d1> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.8 (1.0.8-10) Date: 13 Feb 2003 22:54:22 -0500 Message-Id: <1045194862.14683.32.camel@x1-6-00-d0-70-00-74-d1> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 770 Lines: 20 On Thu, 2003-02-13 at 22:11, Keith Adamson wrote: > > How about also including a connect()/bind() interface so that > you can sort of have a "sockets for signals" type interface. > This seems like a nice type of interface for synchronization. > And maybe use send()/recv() instead of read()/write(). Or am > I on crack:) > I guess what I'm trying to say is that if you want to generalize a synchronous signal delivery interface I think the networking interface is a better paradigm than the filesystem interface. - 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/