Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 10:44:32 -0500 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Cc: mdf@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FILE's _file can only hold a short Message-ID: <201301111044.32719.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <CAMBSHm_-5JUGX5nGyOLjMxpQjnh=7%2B5NkPnP1-i0OjSEKe7D6Q@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAMBSHm_-5JUGX5nGyOLjMxpQjnh=7%2B5NkPnP1-i0OjSEKe7D6Q@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday, October 31, 2012 02:12:55 PM mdf@freebsd.org wrote: > I seem to recall a thread earlier on this limitation, but looking at > actual libc/stdio sources, the 4 year old check for open(2)'s fd being > less than SHRT_MAX is still there. I thought I saw a patch to change > this to an int, but it's not in the tree. Was this in a PR or a > mailing list thread or am I just imagining things? > > We've run into this limitation at work, where some processes have > around 32k open file descriptors and then try to use the libc FILE > interface. Since we control ABI we can just change this to int, but I > had been hoping there was a FreeBSD revision we could pull instead of > having another diff. I had been working on a port-exp run. The problem I have run into is that perl actually reaches inside of FILE directly to clear out _file so it can control when the fd is actually closed (really gross). I have extended my stuff so that old Perl binaries should still work, but wanted to figure out how to prevent future Perl binaries from growing the same dependency. Also, I haven't had a chance to do a follow-up to find what else out in ports-land tries to use _file directly from FILE. -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201301111044.32719.jhb>