Brian Fundakowski Feldman wrote:
> There were zero comments about what order things happen in; in fact,
> the ordering in this case is Just Plain Lame (TM). It's much more
> correct to explicitly check for fp->f_count == 1.
Not sure what you mean. The commit clearly states that POSIX and BSD
locking intentionally handled in different ways here. Frankly, I see
nothing lame in the ordering. The second VOP_ADVLOCK just should be
moved to fdrop().
> > BTW, I have another little concern with that commit: It make possible for
> > last close() of a file descriptor to return 0 instead of the error from
> > VOP_CLOSE(), and the error from VOP_CLOSE() to be ignored.
When a process do closef() on a descriptor "held" by another process
(by fhold(), e.g. the process do read() on the descriptor), it will
just return 0 without the call to fo_close(). Then, when the other
process drop the descriptor, fdrop() call fo_close() but the error is
thrown away. No?
Dima
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
