tech-userlevel archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: datagram vs stream sockets (Emmanuel Dreyfus) writes:

> der Mouse <mouse%Rodents-Montreal.ORG@localhost> wrote:
>> > Perhaps the kernel just checks that a frame is consumed before
>> > sending a new one?  Unfortunately I am unaware of such a posibility
>> > with stream sockets.
>> In general, it's not possible.  In the specific case of AF_LOCAL, it's
>> relatively easy, at least within the kernel, because the peer socket is
>> available for direct inspection.
> The question is: do we have any way of doing that from userland? 
> I suspect that just using blocking I/O would fix the problem.
> Unfortunately, I need non-blocking input. As far as I know it is not
> possible to have non-blocking input and blocking output.

Why don't you have a real /dev/fuse, and then just have libperfuse
tunnel to it like a pty?

Attachment: pgphKnSpsKG1v.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index