On Thu, 7 Jun 2007, Alan Cox wrote: > > > prctl(PR_SPARSEFD, 1); > > > > > > to turn on sparse fd allocation for a process ? > > > > There was a little discussion where I tried to whisper something similar, > > but Linus and Uli shot me :) - with good reasons IMO. > > You may link to runtimes that are not non-sequentialfd aware, and will > > break them. > > Linking to the correct version of a libary and getting the library > versioning right is not rocket science and isn't a sane excuse. Its no > different to the stdio to large fd migration issues with many Unixen and > they all coped just fine.
I don't think it's a matter of versioning. Many userspace libraries expects their fds to be compact (for many reasons - they use select, they use them to index 0-based arrays, etc...), and if the kernel suddendly starts returning values in the 1<<28 up arena, they sure won't be happy. So I believe that the correct way is that the caller specifically selects the feature, leaving the legacy fd allocation as default. - Davide - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
