lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 07 May 2011 07:25:45 +0200 From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> To: Changli Gao <xiaosuo@...il.com> Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: add FD_CLOFORK and O_CLOFORK Le samedi 07 mai 2011 à 12:49 +0800, Changli Gao a écrit : > If FD_CLOFORK is 1, when a fork occurs, the corresponding file descriptor > will be closed for the child process. IOW, the file descriptor isn't > inheritable. > > FD_CLOFORK is used as IBM does. Is it part of a standard, and what could be the use for such thing ? Why had we wait 2011 to add it in linux ? > > O_CLOFORK is also added to avoid the additional fcntl(2) after open(2). > > Signed-off-by: Changli Gao <xiaosuo@...il.com> Your implementation has some peformance implication. close_on_exec and close_on_fork bit for a given fd would be on separate cache lines. So you add a cost on threaded programs for open()/close() [ Yes, we apparently clear close_on_exec bit in close()... we could let it untouched and make flush_old_files() aware of that ] -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists