[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1304745945.2821.601.camel@edumazet-laptop>
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