Re: bidirectional named pipe?

[H. Peter Anvin]

Followup to:  <[e-mail]>
By author:    "David L. Nicol" <[e-mail]>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
> 
> How hard would it be to add? The limitation on fifos that you get the same
> one every time you open it makes some things tricky -- the server has to
> move the fifo and mkfifo a new one to replace its data with something else,
> for instance, which is not atomic.
> 
> I don't understand, in the original problem, how the server opens
> the named bipipe differently from the servers, to be on one end rather than
> the other.
> 
> A way to map a file name to a socket pair would be nice, the first to open
> it could get one end of it and everyone else would get the other end, or there
> would be a switch.
> 
> You could patch the file system code, I wonder how deep the changes would have
> to be, if you did it in terms of lots of fifos.
> 

I would really like it if open() on a socket would be the same thing
to connect to a socket as a client.  I don't think it's a good idea to
do that for the server side, though, since it would have to know about
accept() anyway.

	-hpa
-- 
<[e-mail]> at work, <[e-mail]> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt