[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <517f3f820804240945l2dc203afx8fa432ac41219236@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 18:45:43 +0200
From: "Michael Kerrisk" <mtk.manpages@...il.com>
To: "Alan Cox" <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: "David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, jakub@...hat.com,
drepper@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] alternative to sys_indirect, part 1
On 4/24/08, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 09:00:08 -0700 (PDT)
>
> David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>
>
> > From: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
> > Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 16:24:44 +0100
> >
> > > BTW in 4.4BSD and derivatives if I remember rightly F_CLOEXEC *is*
> > > inherited across accept() so I doubt any user space software will be too
> > > upset by such a shift.
> >
> > It actually doesn't.
> >
> > Just like in Linux, no file descriptor flags are inherited.
>
>
> NDELAY certainly appears to be looking at Stevens.
A while back I did some testing of this point. These were the results I noted:
FreeBSD 4.8
O_NONBLOCK and O_ASYNC are inherited
FD_CLOEXEC is not inherited
Solaris 8
O_NONBLOCK and O_ASYNC are inherited
FD_CLOEXEC is not inherited
Tru64 5.1 (sep 03, testdrive)
No F_SETFL flags are inherited
FD_CLOEXEC is not inherited
HP-UX 11
No F_SETFL flags are inherited
FD_CLOEXEC is not inherited
--
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