On Thu, 7 Jun 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 7 Jun 2007, Davide Libenzi wrote:
> >
> > We'd still need sys_nonseqfd() though, to move/dup legacy fds into the
> > non-sequential area.
>
> Umm. No we don't. Because it's no more than
>
> indirect_syscall(dup, FD_NONSEQ)
>
> isn't it?
Hmm, ok. It need some changes since sys_dup() and F_DUPFD uses common code
at the moment, but it'd ok.
Basically, everything that calls get_unused_fd() can get the magic
indirect_syscall() settings. I was just planning to localize the
sequential/non-sequential behaviour just in there.
The sys_dup(), sys_dup2() and F_DUPFD have some custom code, although
sys_dup() should really use get_unused_fd() in any way.
- 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]
