Re: [PATCH] procfs: fix tid fdinfo

[Miklos Szeredi]

On Mon, 2010-04-26 at 09:49 +0200, Jerome Marchand wrote:
> On 04/23/2010 10:07 PM, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > On Sat, 2010-04-24 at 22:27 +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> >> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 11:16:20AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 17:40:07 +0200
> >>>> -	DIR("fdinfo",    S_IRUSR|S_IXUSR, proc_fdinfo_inode_operations, proc_fd_operations),
> >>>> +	DIR("fdinfo",    S_IRUSR|S_IXUSR, proc_fdinfo_inode_operations, proc_fdinfo_operations),
> >>
> >>> hm, the code's been like that for over a year.  What are the
> >>> user-visible effects of the bug, and of this change?
> >>
> >> /proc/*/task/*/fdinfo contains symlinks to opened files like /proc/*/fd/
> >> which is cool bug :-)
> > 
> > Yeah, at least now we can see that someone has started using this
> > interface ;)
> 
> AFAIK there is still nobody using it, but lsof should use it, and 
> /proc/<pid>/task/<tid>/fd/ too. I haven't checked the code, but as it is
> now, it doesn't spot files open by a thread which does share its father's
> file descriptor table.

Yes, apparently "lsof" doesn't care about contents of /proc/$PID/task.
Well, tasks with separate file descriptor tables are rare, POSIX threads
share their descriptor tables.  But it would be nice if this were fixed.

Thanks,
Miklos


--
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/