[lkml]   [2012]   [Apr]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] nextfd(2)
On 04/06/2012 02:54 AM, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> Without proc knowledge about fdtable is gathered linearly and still unreliable.
> With nextfd(2), even procful environments could lose several failure branches.
> And they can keep old dumb fd++ or smart /proc/self/fd loops for a change.

Incidentally, if we were to create a system call for this -- which I so
far see no reason for -- I would make it return a select-style bitmask
of file descriptors in use, not a "next fd" which would require a system
call per iteration.


H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.

 \ /
  Last update: 2012-04-06 18:25    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital Ocean