On Mo, 09.01.23 15:18, Simo Sorce (simo@xxxxxxxxxx) 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
