On Thu, 7 Jun 2007, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > prctl(PR_SPARSEFD, 1);
> > >
> > > to turn on sparse fd allocation for a process ?
> >
> > There was a little discussion where I tried to whisper something similar,
> > but Linus and Uli shot me :) - with good reasons IMO.
> > You may link to runtimes that are not non-sequentialfd aware, and will
> > break them.
>
> Linking to the correct version of a libary and getting the library
> versioning right is not rocket science and isn't a sane excuse. Its no
> different to the stdio to large fd migration issues with many Unixen and
> they all coped just fine.
I don't think it's a matter of versioning. Many userspace libraries
expects their fds to be compact (for many reasons - they use select, they
use them to index 0-based arrays, etc...), and if the kernel suddendly
starts returning values in the 1<<28 up arena, they sure won't be happy.
So I believe that the correct way is that the caller specifically selects
the feature, leaving the legacy fd allocation as default.
- Davide
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
