On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Justin Brown <justin.br...@fandingo.org> wrote: > On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 11:59 PM, Kay Sievers <k...@vrfy.org> wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 4:26 AM, Justin Brown <justin.br...@fandingo.org> >> wrote: >>> I've been reading over some of the articles about KDBus and have a >>> question about reclaiming memfds. Let's say that I have a process >>> which is sending out a large amount of data over lots of signals, and >>> there are more than one potential subscriber. Is there (or will there >>> be) any mechanism that these signals can "expire" after some >>> conditions are met, or will the data just continue to build-up in each >>> subscriber until it frees the memfds? Additionally, would there be a >>> way to automatically expire these signals after a period of time, >>> once a certain number of signals are received, or preferably once a >>> certain amount of data are received? If that is (or will be) possible, >>> any idea how the subscriber would be handle signals expiring. >> >> Memfds or other fds cannot be broadcasted, only attached to directed >> messages.
> Thanks for the response. In that case, how efficient are signals in > comparison to methods with kdbus? I was under the impression that > memfds are one of the fundamental reason that kdbus will be suitable > for sending large data payloads. There is not real difference, everything is just a message, being a signal or a method. Only signals are limited to pure copied data, disallowing fds; therefore signals will not be suitable for really large data. Kay _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
