From owner-freebsd-arch Fri Dec 20 18:37: 9 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 494DF37B401; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 18:37:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1808343EDA; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 18:37:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from bright@elvis.mu.org) Received: by elvis.mu.org (Postfix, from userid 1192) id E3DDDAE255; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 18:37:07 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 18:37:07 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein To: arch@freebsd.org Cc: bde@freebsd.org Subject: pipes and FIONBIO breakage? Message-ID: <20021221023707.GK23663@elvis.mu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG I noticed that the ioctl handler for pipes doesn't do anything for FIONBIO requests, this is in contrast to the socket handling of FIONBIO requests which sets the SS_NBIO flag in the socket structure. I think this may cause a descrepency between how pipes and sockets behave where there shouldn't be one. This can happen if one dup(2)s a pipe and then calls FIONBIO on it, the file status may change only one of the descriptors not the actual underlying pipe's behavior. Should we actually OR in a flag into the pipe's data structure and use that instead of the struct file's flag? This seems to be what the socket code does. thanks, -- -Alfred Perlstein [alfred@freebsd.org] 'Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology," start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom.' To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message