From: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
To: chet.ramey@case.edu
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, sukadev@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
bug-bash@gnu.org, chet@po.cwru.edu
Subject: Re: bash: Correct usage of F_SETFD
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2010 15:27:06 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CEAEE3A.4090004@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <101122221640.AA32947.SM@caleb.INS.CWRU.Edu>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 983 bytes --]
On 11/22/2010 03:16 PM, Chet Ramey wrote:
>> include/filecntl.h in bash-4.1 has following:
>>
>> #define SET_CLOSE_ON_EXEC(fd) (fcntl ((fd), F_SETFD, FD_CLOEXEC))
>>
>> Is that really the correct/intended usage of F_SETFD ?
>
> F_SETFD Set the close-on-exec flag associated with fildes to
> the low order bit of arg (0 or 1 as above).
>
>> If kernel ever adds a new flag to the fd, this would end up clearing the
>> other new flag right ?
>>
>> Shouldn't bash use F_GETFD to get the current flags and set/clear just
>> the FD_CLOEXEC bit ?
>
> I suppose it would matter if there are systems that have more than one
> flag value.
In practice, there aren't any such systems; but POSIX warns that current
practice is no indicator of future systems, and that read-modify-write
is the only way to use F_SETFD.
--
Eric Blake eblake@redhat.com +1-801-349-2682
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 619 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-22 22:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-11-22 20:16 bash: Correct usage of F_SETFD Sukadev Bhattiprolu
2010-11-22 22:16 ` Chet Ramey
2010-11-22 22:27 ` Eric Blake [this message]
2010-11-23 0:04 ` Sukadev Bhattiprolu
2010-11-23 14:42 ` Matthew Wilcox
2010-11-23 14:51 ` Eric Blake
2010-11-23 17:51 ` Sukadev Bhattiprolu
2010-11-24 1:17 ` Jamie Lokier
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4CEAEE3A.4090004@redhat.com \
--to=eblake@redhat.com \
--cc=bug-bash@gnu.org \
--cc=chet.ramey@case.edu \
--cc=chet@po.cwru.edu \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sukadev@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).