linux-kernel - Re: PROPOSAL: extend pipe() to support NULL argument.

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 6 Jul 2009 09:12:42 +0800
From:	Changli Gao <xiaosuo@...il.com>
To:	Albert ARIBAUD <albert.aribaud@...e.fr>
Cc:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Amerigo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: PROPOSAL: extend pipe() to support NULL argument.

On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 6:28 PM, Albert ARIBAUD<albert.aribaud@...e.fr> wrote:
> Changli Gao a écrit :
>
>> Yea, in many cases, max fd number must be enlarged. More fds means
>> more memory. Although memory is cheaper today, we have to do our best
>> to save money.
>
> Sorry for interrupting, but I don't see how pipe could return a single fd,
> considering there are two (partly) independent ends, each being read (resp.
> written) in their own time, and an fd has only one "current read/write
> position" IIUC.
>
> If the proposal is to have two independent positions (one for reads and one
> for writes) for a single fd, then I am not sure the gain in the number of
> fds used is worth the loss in the increased size of the fd structure.
>
> Am I missing something?
pipe doesn't support llseek.


-- 
Regards，
Changli Gao(xiaosuo@...il.com)
--
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/