From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 15:36:04 -0800 From: "Roman V. Shaposhnik" In-reply-to: To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Message-id: <1231457764.6916.79.camel@goose.sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: Cc: lucio@proxima.alt.za Subject: Re: [9fans] Why do we need syspipe() ? Topicbox-Message-UUID: 7db2f174-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Mon, 2009-01-05 at 11:00 +0000, roger peppe wrote: > i've sometimes thought that the trick used by #d etc could > be made more transparent by providing a genuine capability > service for fds, in the form of a system call, for instance > > getfdcap(int fd, char *buf, int len) > > then instead of just writing the fd itself, you'd write > the capability - thus the write can bridge several > namespaces, as long as it ends up in the same kernel, > which can then utilise the capability. > > the fact that this also provides the possibility of implementing > sendfd might or might not be an advantage. In light of the recent discussion, I now see how providing this basic capability could be a very useful building block for the rest of the system. Not in a sense, that it'll be plugging a particular gaping hole, but rather that thrown into the mix, it might help foster better ideas/implementations. Thanks, Roman.