From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Nov 29 12:21:39 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 9775E16A4CE; Sat, 29 Nov 2003 12:21:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id B7A0143FAF; Sat, 29 Nov 2003 12:21:38 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from bright@elvis.mu.org)
Received: by elvis.mu.org (Postfix, from userid 1192)
	id A6CBD2ED459; Sat, 29 Nov 2003 12:21:38 -0800 (PST)
Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 12:21:38 -0800
From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org>
To: Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com>
Message-ID: <20031129202138.GU35957@elvis.mu.org>
References: <20031123023649.GG35957@elvis.mu.org>
	<Pine.GSO.4.10.10311222342030.18080-100000@pcnet5.pcnet.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10311222342030.18080-100000@pcnet5.pcnet.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
cc: re@freebsd.org
cc: current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] please review. file descriptor passing for libc_r.
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 20:21:39 -0000

* Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com> [031122 20:46] wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Nov 2003, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> 
> > This should make things work properly for apps that are linked
> > against libc_r and use filedescriptor passing.
> > 
> > Can someone review and approve it please?
> 
> This isn't needed.  Any time a file descriptor is used, a call
> should first be made to _FD_LOCK() which ends up calling
> _thread_fd_lock() which then calls _thread_fd_table_init()
> for the file descriptor.
> 
> If there's a reason that this is necessary, then I think it
> is just covering up another problem.  I think I made this
> same comment a couple of years ago ;-)

Sorry for the long delay here, I was in Vegas for my sister's
birthday.

Actually there is a problem here. :(

Descriptor's passed can't be closed because the uthread kernel does this:

int
_close(int fd)
{
        int             flags;
        int             ret;
        struct stat     sb;
        struct fd_table_entry   *entry;

        if ((fd < 0) || (fd >= _thread_dtablesize) ||
            (fd == _thread_kern_pipe[0]) || (fd == _thread_kern_pipe[1]) ||
            (_thread_fd_table[fd] == NULL)) {
                /*
                 * Don't allow silly programs to close the kernel pipe
                 * and non-active descriptors.
                 */
                errno = EBADF;
                ret = -1;
        }
...

So basically, if the entry is not initialized we can't close descriptors.

What do you suggest we do?

-- 
- Alfred Perlstein
- Research Engineering Development Inc.
- email: bright@mu.org cell: 408-480-4684