On 7 Jun 2001, Florian Weimer wrote:
> There's a subtle difference: For malloc(), libc has a mutex (or
> whatever), but for open(), socket() etc., no locking is performed, and
> many libc functions create (and destroy) descriptors imlicitely.
So? You don't have to close() descriptors you had not (to your code
knowledge) opened. End of story.
> I still don't see how you can write maintainable and reliable software
> with asynchronous close(). For example, if some select() call returns
> EBADF after an asynchronous close(), you would have to scan the
> descriptors to find the offending one, but in the meantime, it has
> been reused by another thread. What do you do in this case?
You don't rely on EBADF. It's _your_ code that had closed the thing. Unless
you pass descriptors of unknown origin into select() (hardly a good idea)
you have all information you need to provide an exclusion.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jun 07 2001 - 21:01:01 EST