On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 11:26 AM, Jeremy Allison <jra@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Amen to that :-). > > However, after talking with Jeff and Jim at CollabSummit, > I was 'encouraged' to make my opinions known on the list. > > To me, calling the creds handle a file descriptor just > feels wrong. IT *isn't* an fd, you can't read/write/poll > on it, and it's only done as a convenience to get the > close-on-exec semantics and the fact that the creds are > already hung off the fd's in kernel space. Windows calls these things "handles." Linux has "file descriptors," and there's plenty of precedent for things that aren't files. > > I'd rather any creads call use a different type, even if > it's a typedef of 'int -> creds_handle_t', just to make > it really clear it's *NOT* an fd. > > That way we can also make it clear this thing only has > meaning to a thread group, and SHOULD NOT (and indeed > preferably CAN NOT) be passed between processes. > If you want those semantics, then stick a struct pid * in there for the tgid of the cretor and make sure that current's tgid matches when you try to use it. I think they'd be more useful without that check, though. BTW, what do you want to have happen on fork? I think they should keep working. > Cheers, > > Jeremy. -- Andy Lutomirski AMA Capital Management, LLC -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
