Re: [patch/rfc] eventfd semaphore-like behavior

From: Andrew Morton
Date: Wed Feb 04 2009 - 18:55:46 EST


On Wed, 4 Feb 2009 15:27:45 -0800 (PST)
Davide Libenzi <davidel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Wed, 4 Feb 2009, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 4 Feb 2009 15:18:43 -0800 (PST)
> > Davide Libenzi <davidel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > > > Simple test here:
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.xmailserver.org/eventfd-sem.c
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > >
> > > > > +/*
> > > > > + * CAREFUL: Check include/asm-generic/fcntl.h when defining
> > > > > + * new flags, since they might collide with O_* ones. We want
> > > > > + * to re-use O_* flags that couldn't possibly have a meaning
> > > > > + * from eventfd, in order to leave a free define-space for
> > > > > + * shared O_* flags.
> > > > > + */
> > > > > +#define EFD_SEMAPHORE (1 << 0)
> > > > > #define EFD_CLOEXEC O_CLOEXEC
> > > > > #define EFD_NONBLOCK O_NONBLOCK
> > > > >
> > > > > +#define EFD_SHARED_FCNTL_FLAGS (O_CLOEXEC | O_NONBLOCK)
> > > > > +#define EFD_FLAGS_SET (EFD_SHARED_FCNTL_FLAGS | EFD_SEMAPHORE)
> > > >
> > > > How would you recommend that userspace determine whether its kernel
> > > > supports this feature, bearing in mind that someone might backport this
> > > > patch into arbitrarily earlier kernel versions?
> > > >
> > > > What should be userspace's fallback strategy if that support is not
> > > > present?
> > >
> > > #ifdef EFD_SEMAPHORE, maybe?
> >
> > That's compile-time. People who ship binaries will probably want
> > to find a runtime thing for back-compatibility.
>
> I dunno. How do they actually do when we add new flags, like the O_ ones?
>

Dunno. Probably try the syscall and see if it returned -EINVAL. Does
that work in this case? If so, it would be sensible to mention this in
the description somewhere as the approved probing method and to
maintain it.


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/