* Re: fcntl error
[not found] <7051.1079628297@redhat.com>
@ 2004-03-18 17:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-03-18 17:47 ` Andreas Schwab
2004-03-19 9:38 ` David Howells
0 siblings, 2 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Linus Torvalds @ 2004-03-18 17:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Howells; +Cc: Andrew Morton, Kernel Mailing List, linux-arch
On Thu, 18 Mar 2004, David Howells wrote:
>
> The attached patch fixes a minor problem with fcntl.
I agree that it is a cleanup, but I disagree on the "problem" part.
> get_close_on_exec() uses FD_ISSET() to determine the fd state. However,
> FD_ISSET() does not return 0 or 1 on all archs. On some it returns 0 or non-0,
> which is fine by POSIX.
FD_ISSET() is broken if it returns anything but 0/1, in my not-so-humble
opinion.
Looking at the implementations, you are right that some architectures
don't do this right, but that is a bug, and it's a bug in FD_ISSET(), not
in fcntl.
The fact is, FD_ISSET() isn't always used in just as a conditional, and
you're supposed to be able to do
int was_set = FD_ISSET(..);
...
and in fact I'd suggest very _strongly_ that it also should work with
bool is_set = FD_ISSET(..);
where some people use "char" for booleans for space reasons.
That implies that while non-zero for "set" is ok, that non-zero had better
have the _low_ bits set. Which is not true on architectures that use just
a logical and with the bits in the word.
Which implies that FD_ISSET() really must NOT be of that "logical and"
approach, which in turn implies that it should be either a inequality
expression, or it should be a "shift down and then and with 1".
And in both of those cases, the result ends up being 0/1. So we might as
well just make it so.
In short, the real bug is elsewhere.
> Also, the argument of set_close_on_exec() is being AND'ed with literal 1. This
> is incorrect - there's no requirement for FD_CLOEXEC to be 1.
Not in theory, no. In practice, it always is.
I'd suggest architecture maintainers fix their __FD_ISSET()
implementations to conform to the proper return value.
Linus
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: fcntl error
2004-03-18 17:30 ` fcntl error Linus Torvalds
@ 2004-03-18 17:47 ` Andreas Schwab
2004-03-19 9:38 ` David Howells
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Andreas Schwab @ 2004-03-18 17:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Torvalds
Cc: David Howells, Andrew Morton, Kernel Mailing List, linux-arch
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> writes:
> On Thu, 18 Mar 2004, David Howells wrote:
>>
>> The attached patch fixes a minor problem with fcntl.
>
> I agree that it is a cleanup, but I disagree on the "problem" part.
>
>> get_close_on_exec() uses FD_ISSET() to determine the fd state. However,
>> FD_ISSET() does not return 0 or 1 on all archs. On some it returns 0 or non-0,
>> which is fine by POSIX.
>
> FD_ISSET() is broken if it returns anything but 0/1, in my not-so-humble
> opinion.
POSIX clearly says that _any_ non-zero value is ok, similar to the ctype.h
functions. Of course, the kernel can set different standards internally.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de
SuSE Linux AG, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: fcntl error
2004-03-18 17:30 ` fcntl error Linus Torvalds
2004-03-18 17:47 ` Andreas Schwab
@ 2004-03-19 9:38 ` David Howells
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: David Howells @ 2004-03-19 9:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Torvalds; +Cc: Andrew Morton, Kernel Mailing List, linux-arch
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> wrote:
> That implies that while non-zero for "set" is ok, that non-zero had better
> have the _low_ bits set. Which is not true on architectures that use just
> a logical and with the bits in the word.
>
> Which implies that FD_ISSET() really must NOT be of that "logical and"
> approach, which in turn implies that it should be either a inequality
> expression, or it should be a "shift down and then and with 1".
Or maybe:
#define __FD_ISSET(d, set) (!!((set)->fds_bits[__FDELT(d)] & __FDMASK(d)))
Which is probably better than a shift and bit-and. That then leaves it up to
the compiler as to whether the generation of 0 or 1 is actually necessary
(which if isn't if it's just the condition in an if-statement).
Or even:
#define FD_ISSET(fd,fdsetp) (!!__FD_ISSET(fd,fdsetp))
Which would then apply to all arch's regardless.
David
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-03-19 9:39 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <7051.1079628297@redhat.com>
2004-03-18 17:30 ` fcntl error Linus Torvalds
2004-03-18 17:47 ` Andreas Schwab
2004-03-19 9:38 ` David Howells
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox