Re: [PATCH 2/2] pidfd: add pidfdfs

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 20. 05. 24, 21:15, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Mon, 20 May 2024 at 12:01, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

So how about just a patch like this?  It doesn't do anything
*internally* to the inodes, but it fixes up what we expose to user
level to make it look like lsof expects.

Note that the historical dname for those pidfs files was
"anon_inode:[pidfd]", and that patch still kept the inode number in
there, so now it's "anon_inode:[pidfd-XYZ]", but I think lsof is still
happy with that.

Now the last column of lsof still differs from 6.8:
-[pidfd:1234]
+[pidfd-4321]

And lsof tests still fail, as "lsof -F pfn" is checked against:
    if ! fgrep -q "p${pid} f${fd} n[pidfd:$pid]" <<<"$line"; then

Where $line is:
p1015 f3 n[pidfd-1315]

Wait, even if I change that minus to a colon, the inner pid (1315) differs from the outer (1015), but it should not (according to the test).

regards,
--
js
suse labs





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [NTFS 3]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [NTFS 3]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]

  Powered by Linux