[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <465DF299.6030208@goop.org>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 14:54:33 -0700
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>,
Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
Zach Brown <zach.brown@...cle.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@....com.au>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Suparna Bhattacharya <suparna@...ibm.com>,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: Syslets, Threadlets, generic AIO support, v6
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Side note: it might not even be a "close-on-exec by default" thing: it
> might well be a *always* close-on-exec.
>
> That COE is pretty horrid to do, we need to scan a bitmap of those things
> on each exec. So it migth be totally sensible to just declare that the
> non-linear fd's would simply always be "local", and never bleed across an
> execve).
Hm, I wouldn't limit the mechanism prematurely. Using Valgrind as an
example of an alternate user of this mechanism, it would be useful to
use a pipe to transmit out-of-band information from an exec-er to an
exec-ee process. At the moment there's a lot mucking around with
execve() to transmit enough information from the parent valgrind to its
successor.
J
-
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