On Thu, 7 Jun 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Thu, 7 Jun 2007, Davide Libenzi wrote: > > > > We'd still need sys_nonseqfd() though, to move/dup legacy fds into the > > non-sequential area. > > Umm. No we don't. Because it's no more than > > indirect_syscall(dup, FD_NONSEQ) > > isn't it?
Hmm, ok. It need some changes since sys_dup() and F_DUPFD uses common code at the moment, but it'd ok. Basically, everything that calls get_unused_fd() can get the magic indirect_syscall() settings. I was just planning to localize the sequential/non-sequential behaviour just in there. The sys_dup(), sys_dup2() and F_DUPFD have some custom code, although sys_dup() should really use get_unused_fd() in any way. - 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/
