Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 07 Jun 2007 20:57:12 +0200 | From | Eric Dumazet <> | Subject | Re: [patch 7/8] fdmap v2 - implement sys_socket2 |
| |
Davide Libenzi a écrit : > On Thu, 7 Jun 2007, Eric Dumazet wrote: > >> accept2(int fd, ...) > > I don't see any reason to not have it inherit the non-sequential > characteristics of "fd". > > > >> pipe2(int *fds, int oflags); > > I think pipe+sys_nonseqfd should be OK for those.
yes, but O_CLOEXEC/O_CLOFORK ?
I was refering to Uli wanting to close races on multi-threading apps doing a fork() while a thread is doing :
fd = open() <---- race here if another thread does a fork() ----> fcntl( CLOEXEC)
> > > >> eventfd2(int count, int oflags); >> signalfd2(int ufd, sigset_t __user *user_mask, size_t sizemask, int oflags); >> timerfd2(int ufd, int clockid, int flags,const struct itimerspec __user *utmr, int oflags) ... > > Those I think we're still in time to change the interface. No? > Even if not, those are not perf-critical, so I think that > syscall+sys_nonseqfd is still fine.
Same point here, non a nonseqfd problem.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |