Re: bidirectional named pipe?

From: H. Peter Anvin (
Date: Thu Feb 08 2001 - 18:10:08 EST

Followup to: <>
By author: "David L. Nicol" <>
In newsgroup:
> 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.


<> at work, <> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Feb 15 2001 - 21:00:12 EST