Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2013 12:24:04 -0700 From: Yuri <yuri@rawbw.com> To: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com> Cc: Roman Divacky <rdivacky@freebsd.org>, Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org>, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Linux epoll(7) patch Message-ID: <51FFFBD4.7070705@rawbw.com> In-Reply-To: <20130805153946.GA29300@dft-labs.eu> References: <51FF7211.6020909@rawbw.com> <51FFC31D.3080304@mu.org> <20130805152556.GA37810@freebsd.org> <20130805153946.GA29300@dft-labs.eu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 08/05/2013 08:39, Mateusz Guzik wrote: > What happens to fd after the fork? Is it closed or simply remains > non-functional? > > If the former, I suggest the patch is altered to leave fd with badfdops > in place so that epoll users get less surprised. I will try to alter it this way. However, there is no easy way of testing such case, apart from compiling specially crafted linux program. Also forking after poll is a marginal case. Doubt it ever matters in practice. I found two more problems with the patch: epoll_wait treats timeout as if it was in microseconds, when it is in milliseconds. Also epoll_wait doesn't check for the special case of timeout=-1. I corrected both issues. Will do additional testing, and will submit PR with an updated patch when done. Yuri
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?51FFFBD4.7070705>