Re: Using (stripped down ei.h) with generic TCP instead of ports
Valentin Micic <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lang.erlang.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hmmm, I hope you’re not thinking that ei library does not involve “some form of encoding/decoding”, for that would be strange given that the most of function names in ei library contain words such as “encode” or decode”. Just sayin’. V/ > On 19 Sep 2020, at 21:29, Brett Hemes <[email protected]> wrote: > > Could you perhaps elaborate on your reply a bit? The RT development environment (running in kernel mode) offers only a memory mapped interface besides the aforementioned UDP/TCP option for communication between the RT modules and user mode applications. I believe “exposing the interface” would require me to both make an interface from scratch and then wrap it as a port driver or NIF to get it into the BEAM. Aside from some arbitrary handshaking interface via registers I could imagine passing strings via fixed length character buffers but I will still need some form of encoding/decoding… which is how I ended up looking at the ei library. > > Also, most of what I have read regarding Erlang seems to favor ports over drivers and NIFs as they better align with the Erlang philosophy but I am too new to all this to really know when each is preferred. > > Thanks much, > Brett > > From: Albin Stigö <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2020 9:32 AM > To: Max Lapshin <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > Cc: Brett Hemes <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>; Erlang Questions <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Using (stripped down ei.h) with generic TCP instead of ports > > I would expose the kernel code through a char or block device driver. There are already many facilities in most kernels for effective communication with userpace. a > After all, that's the whole point of a kernel... > > --Albin > > On Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 16:00 Max Lapshin <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > Your idea is ok. Just strip everything you don't need from ei and it will work for you. > > As for me, I like enif api more, but Sverker has pointed that I'm misuing it inside drivers and it may break once =)