Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760499AbYB1PJR (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Feb 2008 10:09:17 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756591AbYB1PJD (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Feb 2008 10:09:03 -0500 Received: from el-out-1112.google.com ([209.85.162.182]:60673 "EHLO el-out-1112.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755590AbYB1PJB (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Feb 2008 10:09:01 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=hXEHklrPCFdiq2gKfwdRCdyZLDV/dj/r9M8sI7uXfs4X7WrafBHa/edrLEDjsMY09YQb7Eez5ZKnsaD9obZ1Sgj6WM8AI/uXGN0uzpnw1BpBYF+Q2fhowaYL4vZzHM/3hr/mBRFsf8fgYk7BiOqasdBbrMdFFiaQjMZFvAc1Of8= Message-ID: Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:08:56 +0100 From: "Michael Kerrisk" To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu Subject: Re: epoll and shared fd's Cc: 7eggert@gmx.de, "Davide Libenzi" , "Pierre Habouzit" , lkml , "Eric Dumazet" , "Marc Lehmann" , "David Schwartz" In-Reply-To: <19752.1204206788@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <9MZLT-1YO-33@gated-at.bofh.it> <9N6Ng-5tn-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <9P5WE-33i-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <9Pk9l-1KA-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <9PNNZ-b0-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <19752.1204206788@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1402 Lines: 36 On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 2:53 PM, wrote: > On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 19:16:30 +0100, Bodo Eggert said: > > Michael Kerrisk wrote: > > > > > file handle have been closed. This means that > > > even after a file descriptor that is part of an > > > epoll set has been closed, events may be reported > > > for that file descriptor if other file descriptors > > > referring to the same underlying file description > > > remain open. > > Is it worth making special mention of the case where a process gets events > for a FD that it has closed, because a parent or child process still has > an inherited copy of the FD still open? I'm not sure -- perhaps under a BUGS section? Did you read my reply about this point in the thread "Re: epoll design problems with common fork/exec patterns"? Cheers, Michael -- Michael Kerrisk Maintainer of the Linux man-pages project http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ Want to report a man-pages bug? Look here: http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/reporting_bugs.html -- 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/