Re: [PATCH v2 7/8] Use posix_spawn to run external scripts

Pawel Kot <[email protected]> Mon, 20 Jan 2020 00:03:30 +0100
Newsgroups gmane.linux.drivers.gnokii
Message-ID <CAHytCw7UdpGZySiJX-J8iy_DWiMn8PT1kJF_o6ZHY2FT+1L=rg@mail.gmail.com>
--===============2894946428036112318==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000098a4f4059c862f73"

--00000000000098a4f4059c862f73
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

Hi,

On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 10:32 PM Ladislav Michl <[email protected]> wrote:
> posix_spawn specification dates back to last century and its
> implementation is mature enough in all systems we do support.
> Thus use it instead of current fork and exec in hope it will
> save us some resources.

So I think this one does more than described. My understanding is that now
you can pass env variables into a script. Is that correct? And what was
wrong with traditional fork/exec approach? I mean in our particular case.
Did you run into oom in some setups?

I've merged all other patches except this one (and one related) and devices
build refactor (which I do not like in this form) into github. Gonna give
it try (more as in compiling in various setups) and if it works, I'll merge
it to a master. Let me know if you'll find any issues with this version.

Cheers,
--
Pawel Kot

--00000000000098a4f4059c862f73
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">Hi,<br><br>On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 10:32 PM Ladislav Michl =
&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]">[email protected]</a>&gt; wr=
ote:<br>&gt; posix_spawn specification dates back to last century and its<b=
r>&gt; implementation is mature enough in all systems we do support.<br>&gt=
; Thus use it instead of current fork and exec in hope it will<br>&gt; save=
 us some resources.<div><br></div><div>So I think this one does more than d=
escribed. My understanding=C2=A0is that now you can pass env variables into=
 a script. Is that correct? And what was wrong with=C2=A0traditional fork/e=
xec approach? I mean in our particular case. Did you run into oom in some s=
etups?</div><div><br></div><div>I&#39;ve merged all other patches except th=
is one (and one related) and devices build refactor (which I do not like in=
 this form) into github. Gonna give it try (more as in compiling in various=
 setups) and if it works, I&#39;ll merge it to a master. Let me know if you=
&#39;ll find any issues with this version.</div><div><br></div><div>Cheers,=
</div><div>--<br></div><div>Pawel Kot</div></div>

--00000000000098a4f4059c862f73--


--===============2894946428036112318==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: inline

X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KZ25va2lpLXVz
ZXJzIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdApnbm9raWktdXNlcnNAbm9uZ251Lm9yZwpodHRwczovL2xpc3RzLm5v
bmdudS5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9nbm9raWktdXNlcnMK

--===============2894946428036112318==--