Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 15:43:01 +0200 From: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: O_CLOEXEC Message-ID: <20110325134301.GM78089@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> In-Reply-To: <201103250936.56512.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <20110325005923.GI78089@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <201103250814.47903.jhb@freebsd.org> <20110325123422.GK78089@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <201103250936.56512.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--3azwYLLVmtMtZFH5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 09:36:56AM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: > On Friday, March 25, 2011 8:34:22 am Kostik Belousov wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 08:14:47AM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: > > > On Thursday, March 24, 2011 8:59:24 pm Kostik Belousov wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > below is the implementation of O_CLOEXEC flag for open(2). I also > > > > handle the fhopen(2), since the man page states that fhopen(2) takes > > > > the same flags as open(2), and it is more logical to change code > > > > then man page. > > > >=20 > > > > It is somewhat curious that SUSv4 did not specified O_CLOEXEC behav= iour > > > > for posix_openpt(). I left it out, but it probably makes sense to > > > > allow O_CLOEXEC there ? > > > >=20 > > > > The falloc() KPI is left as is because the function is often used > > > > in the kernel and probably in the third-party modules. fdallocf() > > > > takes additional flag argument to set close-on-exec before any other > > > > thread might see new file descriptor. > > >=20 > > > Hmm, I don't actually expect falloc() to be used in 3rd party modules= and=20 > > > would be fine with just adding a new flags parameter to it. > >=20 > > The calls to falloc() appear in such modules as cryptodev(4). > > I do not mind changing falloc interface, but I also intend to merge > > O_CLOEXEC to stable/8. Are you fine with merging your suggestion to > > stable branch, while falloc() is called from cryptodev, zlib, > > linux (later is not a big issue if I bump __FreeBSD_version) ? >=20 > Hmmm, there are a few ways, but perhaps the simplest is to commit the > current approach (and MFC it), but to do a followup commit to HEAD to > remove fallocf() and add the flags argument to falloc(). That changes > the KPI for 9+, but avoids growing the future KPI. I will do this, thanks. --3azwYLLVmtMtZFH5 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAk2Mm+UACgkQC3+MBN1Mb4iSxgCfWL/xnze3fi8GDtAjYrji7GXD vg0AniEHyvVJVlGL7WOEL2jG3JCe8mo6 =zP3o -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --3azwYLLVmtMtZFH5--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110325134301.GM78089>