From: "David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com>
To: "Philippe Troin" <phil@fifi.org>
Cc: "Denis Vlasenko" <vda.linux@googlemail.com>,
       <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: O_NONBLOCK setting "leak" outside of a process??
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2007 16:55:29 -0800
Message-ID: <MDEHLPKNGKAHNMBLJOLKGEJJBFAC.davids@webmaster.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <E0CFA8EB-F706-49E8-A1D1-7BAF19C8D271@e18.physik.tu-muenchen.de>
Reply-To: davids@webmaster.com
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 706
Lines: 21


> That's a bug, right? I couldn't find anything to that effect in IEEE
> Std. 1003.1, 2004 Edition...
>
> Ciao,
>                      Roland

It's not a bug, there's no rational alternative. What would two indepedent
file descriptors for the same end of a TCP connection be? What happens when
you call 'dup' on a file descriptor? The behavior is both the only logical
behavior and consistent with other cases where a file descriptor is
split/duplicated.

DS


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/