On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 04:18:28PM +0100, Boyan Karatotev wrote:
> On 07/09/2020 11:27 am, Dave Martin wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 03, 2020 at 11:20:25AM +0100, Boyan Karatotev wrote:
> >> On 02/09/2020 18:00, Dave Martin wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 02:16:05PM +0100, Boyan Karatotev wrote:
> >>>> +int exec_sign_all(struct signatures *signed_vals, size_t val)
> >>>> +{
> >>>
> >>> Could popen(3) be used here?
> >>>
> >>> Fork-and-exec is notoriously fiddly, so it's preferable to use a library
> >>> function to do it where applicable.I would love to, but the worker needs a bidirectional channel and popen
> >> only gives a unidirectional stream.
> >
> > Ah, fair point.
> >
> > Would it help if you created an additional pipe before calling popen()?
> >
> > May not be worth it, though. For one thing, wiring that extra pipe to
> > stdin or stdout in the child process would require some extra work...
> Well, I probably could, but I doubt the result would be any better. I
> agree that I'm not sure the effort is worth it and would rather keep it
> the same.
Sure, fair enough.
Ideally kselftest would provide some common code for this sort of thing,
but I guess that's a separate discussion.
Cheers
---Dave
