lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Sep]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 14/15] fs/files: export close_fd() symbol
2017-09-07 Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>:

> On Thu, Sep 07, 2017 at 03:42:25PM -0300, Gustavo Padovan wrote:
> > From: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@collabora.com>
> >
> > Rename __close_fd() to close_fd() and export it to be able close files
> > in modules using file descriptors.
> >
> > The usecase that motivates this change happens in V4L2 where we send
> > events to userspace with a fd that has file installed in it. But if for
> > some reason we have to cancel the video stream we need to close the files
> > that haven't been shared with userspace yet. Thus the export of
> > close_fd() becomes necessary.
> >
> > fd_install() happens when we call an ioctl to queue a buffer, but we only
> > share the fd with userspace later, and that may happen in a kernel thread
> > instead.
>
> NAK. As soon as the reference is in descriptor table, you *can't* do anything
> to it. This "sharing" part is complete BS - being _told_ that descriptor is
> there does not matter at all. That descriptor might be hit with dup2() as
> soon as fd_install() has happened. Or be closed, or any number of other things.
>
> You can not take it back. Once fd_install() is done, it's fucking done, period.
> If V4L2 requires removing it from descriptor table, it's a shitty API and needs
> to be fixed.

Sorry for my lack of knowledge here and thank you for the explanation,
things are a lot clear to me. For some reasons I were trying to delay
the sharing of the fd to a event later. I can delay the install of it
but that my require __fd_install() to be available and exportedi as it
may happen in a thread, but I believe you wouldn't be okay with that either,
is that so?

Gustavo

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-09-07 23:24    [W:0.091 / U:7.956 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site