From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" Subject: Re: [PATCH] fexecve.3: ATTRIBUTES: Note function that is thread-safe Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 21:01:33 +0200 Message-ID: <557B2C8D.3030401@gmail.com> References: <1432721584-11342-1-git-send-email-zenglg.jy@cn.fujitsu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-man-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Samuel Bronson , Zeng Linggang Cc: mtk.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, linux-man-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-man@vger.kernel.org Hi Zeng Linggang, On 05/27/2015 05:42 PM, Samuel Bronson wrote: > On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 6:12 AM, Zeng Linggang wrote: >> After research, We think fexecve() is thread-safe. But, there >> is not marking of fexecve() in glibc document. > > Um, fexecve() is just like execve(), only on a file descriptor. (In > fact, it appears to be implemented using execve() on > /proc/self/fd/$FD.) > > As such, the following point from execve(2) applies: > > * All threads other than the calling thread are destroyed during an > execve(). Mutexes, condition variables, and other pthreads objects > are not preserved. > > This does not seem to correspond with the usual notion of "thread > safe", though I guess it would be technically safe to, say, have > several threads racing to run fexecve(). Further text is probably > warranted here. Did you have any thoughts on Samuel's point? Cheers, Michael -- Michael Kerrisk Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html