Re: [PATCH] x86_64: fix delayed signals

[Denys Vlasenko]

On Sunday 13 July 2008 12:46, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 07/12, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> >
> > On Saturday 12 July 2008 22:26, T?r?k Edwin wrote:
> > > A bit off-topic, but something I noticed during the tests:
> > > In my original test I have rm-ed the files right after launching dd in
> > > the background, yet it still continued to write to the disk.
> > > I can understand that if the file is opened O_RDWR, you might seek back
> > > and read what you wrote, so Linux needs to actually do the write,
> > > but why does it insist on writing to the disk, on a file opened with
> > > O_WRONLY, after the file itself got unlinked?
> >
> > Because process can do
> >
> > fcntl(fd, F_SETFL, fcntl(fd, F_GETFL) | O_RDWR)
> 
> Is it?
> 
> SETFL_MASK doesn't have O_RDWR, and in any case setfl() changes ->f_flags,
> not ->f_mode.

Just tested it and you are right.

I distinctly remember seeing such code somewhere. Interesting.
Now I wonder whether it was a bug, or those were not file descriptors,
but sockets?...
--
vda
--
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/