Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date:   Wed, 09 Dec 2020 10:43:16 +0100
From:   Stephen Kitt <steve@sk2.org>
To:     "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>,
        Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>
Cc:     linux-man <linux-man@vger.kernel.org>,
        Alejandro Colomar <alx.manpages@gmail.com>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] close_range.2: new page documenting close_range(2)
In-Reply-To: <20201209094039.ksqlt7g5mq7mp4mq@wittgenstein>
References: <20201208215133.30575-1-steve@sk2.org>
 <CAKgNAki3jRYmTzCMXgBzXTz9LEmmAfRE5VuMOhnDbVmiJU=asg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201209094039.ksqlt7g5mq7mp4mq@wittgenstein>
User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.4.3
Message-ID: <9020961b9cb4ebc61d6a07f603a226aa@sk2.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8;
 format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

Le 09/12/2020 10:40, Christian Brauner a écrit :
> On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 09:50:38AM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) 
> wrote:
>> > +.PP
>> > +.I flags
>> > +can be set to
>> > +.B CLOSE_RANGE_UNSHARE
>> > +to unshare the range of file descriptors from any other processes,
>> > +.I instead
>> > +of closing them.
>> 
>> Really "instead of closing them"? I had supposed that rather that this
>> should be "before closing them". That's also how the kernel code reads
>> to me, from a quick glance.
> 
> It's also mentioned in the commit message. Basically setting
> CLOSE_RANGE_UNSHARE is equivalent to:
> 
> unshare(CLONE_FILES);
> close_range(<start>, <end>);

Yes, I got that mixed up, thanks for the clarification! I'll send a v2 
addressing the review comments later today.

Regards,

Stephen