> the application of a close event. What can I say, "the fd formerly known
> as X" is now gone? It would be incorrect to say that "fd X was closed",
> since X no longer refers to anything, and the application may have reused
> that fd for another file.
Which is precisely why you need to know where in the chain of events this
happened. Otherwise if I see
'read on fd 5'
'read on fd 5'
How do I know which read is for which fd in the multithreaded case
> As for the multi-thread case, this would be a bug; if one thread closes
> the descriptor, the other thread is going to get an EBADF when it goes
> to perform the read.
Another thread may already have reused the fd
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 31 2000 - 21:00:19 EST