Re: IPC with Sockets
Re: IPC with Sockets
- Subject: Re: IPC with Sockets
- From: Justin Walker <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 20:12:59 -0800
On Saturday, February 21, 2004, at 06:55 PM, Mike Smith wrote:
If all you are doing is logging the kext's current condition, use a
sysctl. The massive overhead involved in the socket, and the fact
that you're not maintaining any of the daemon's state in the kext
makes it a bad choice for this model.
From what little I've picked up on Matt's intentions, I don't think the
sysctl will work well. I think he needs the KEXT to inform the daemon
of something, and the only way to do this with sysctls is to poll.
You haven't really helped any of us help you by not describing your
application and design; it's very hard to second-guess something like
this.
Matt is learning this stuff the hard way. He's still trying to figure
out what information is useful and what is not (and he tends to shoot
first and ask himself questions later :-}).
Cheers,
Justin
--
Justin C. Walker, Curmudgeon-At-Large *
Institute for General Semantics | "Weaseling out of things is
what
| separates us from the animals.
| Well, except the weasel."
| - Homer J Simpson
*--------------------------------------*-------------------------------*
_______________________________________________
darwin-kernel mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/darwin-kernel
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.