Matt Helsley [matthltc@xxxxxxxxxx] wrote:
|
| Yes, I think that's sufficient:
|
| int pipefds[2];
|
| ...
|
| restarted_read_fd = 11;
| restarted_write_fd = 12;
|
| ...
|
| pipe(pipefds);
|
| /*
| * pipe() may have returned one (or both) of the restarted fds
| * at the wrong end of the pipe. This could cause dup2() to
| * accidentaly close the pipe. Avoid that with an extra dup().
| */
| if (pipefds[1] == restarted_read_fd) {
| dup2(pipefds[1], last_fd + 1);
| pipefds[1] = last_fd + 1;
| }
|
| if (pipefds[0] != restarted_read_fd) {
| dup2(pipefds[0], restarted_read_fd);
| close(pipefds[0]);
| }
|
| if (pipefds[0] != restarted_read_fd) {
| dup2(pipefds[1], restarted_write_fd);
| close(pipefds[1]);
| }
Shouldn't the last if be
if (pipefds[1] != restarted_wrte_fd) ?
(otherwise it would break if pipefds[0] = 11 and pipefds[1] = 200)
I came up with something similar, but with an extra close(). And
in my code, I had restarted_* names referring to pipefds[] making
it a bit confusing initially.
How about using actual_fds[] (instead of pipefds) and expected_fds[]
instead of (restart_*) ?
Thanks,
Suka
|
| I think this code does the minimal number of operations needed in the
| restarted application too -- it counts on the second dup2() closing one
| of the fds if pipefds[1] == restarted_read_fd.
|
| Cheers,
| -Matt
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
