Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 12:55:40 -0600 From: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> Cc: Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>, Apache Xie <apachexm@hotmail.com> Subject: Re: contigmalloc() and mmap() Message-ID: <42ADD6AC.3060505@samsco.org> In-Reply-To: <20050613184551.GA3853@infradead.org> References: <Pine.GSO.4.43.0506131332380.23852-100000@sea.ntplx.net> <42ADC762.6010801@elischer.org> <20050613181435.GA3096@infradead.org> <42ADD253.4020606@samsco.org> <20050613184551.GA3853@infradead.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 12:37:07PM -0600, Scott Long wrote: > >>How does linux handle the implications of fork(2) in this scenario? > > > it's still counted as the same instance. Similar for dup or passing > descriptors over AF_UNIX sockets. The data is explictly not per-process > but per instance. > > There's not a lot of users actually using this feature, only the tty > subsystem and multi-channel sound drivers for the old oss API that > allowed multiple opens of /dev/dsp that way come to mind. > > Lot's of driver use file->private to get at per-device data easily, > but that's just a shortcut. Ok, I thought that you were talking about per-process data being in the file descriptor. Scott
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?42ADD6AC.3060505>