On Mo, 09.01.23 15:18, Simo Sorce (s...@redhat.com) wrote:

> If I remember correctly the claim was that umh is robust if the user
> space fails and just terminates. As then the kernel know user space is
> gone, whether it got the data it needed or not and can stop waiting.
>
> While messages may never get replied to and require handling timeouts
> and then handling the case a user space process was slow and ignoring
> late replies.
>
> Not sure this is really a good point given waiting indefinitely for a
> user space program that hangs for some reason seems worse to me.
>
> When I had to code a call from knfsd to user space for GSS-Proxy I used
> unix sockets. I think that is better than netlink in some cases as
> sockets are simpler to handle from user space programs and are also
> easily namespaced...

Well, the requests would come from the kernel, and the kernel
typically speaks netlink, not AF_UNIX. But quite frankly, I really
don't care what transport would be used. I'd just be happy if we could
get rid of the kernel forking its own stuff.

Lennart

--
Lennart Poettering, Berlin
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Reply via email to