Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 23:14:37 +0200 From: Marko Zec <zec@icir.org> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: Perforce Change Reviews <perforce@freebsd.org>, Marko Zec <zec@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: PERFORCE change 127942 for review Message-ID: <200710232314.38149.zec@icir.org> In-Reply-To: <471D4514.5050109@elischer.org> References: <200710230018.l9N0IO8l020652@repoman.freebsd.org> <471D4514.5050109@elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tuesday 23 October 2007 02:49:24 Julian Elischer wrote: > question: > > can processes in two vimages communicate if they both have access > to the same named pipe/fifo in the filesystem? Yes, provided that they open the fifo while they would be both attached to the same vnet. Once the sockets would become open the processes could reassociate to arbitrary vimages, while the sockets would remain bound to their original vnets for their entire lifetime duration. As an alternative, we could / should introduce an extended socket() syscall where an additional argument would explicitly specify to which vimage/vnet the new socket should belong. Marko
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200710232314.38149.zec>