Re: epoll and shared fd's

2008-02-26 Thread Davide Libenzi
On Tue, 26 Feb 2008, Michael Kerrisk wrote: > Okay -- I'll look at it some more. I am however loathe to drop the > term open file description, because POSIX uses, as well as a number of > other Linux man pages by now. Heh, POSIX. Now doesn't take a genius to see that "file description" and

Re: epoll and shared fd's

2008-02-26 Thread Michael Kerrisk
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 8:04 PM, Davide Libenzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Tue, 26 Feb 2008, Michael Kerrisk wrote: > > > Following up after quite some time: > > > > Davide Libenzi wrote: > > > On Sat, 26 Jan 2008, Michael Kerrisk wrote: > > > > > >> On Jan 25, 2008 12:57 AM, Davide Libenzi

Re: epoll and shared fd's

2008-02-26 Thread Davide Libenzi
On Tue, 26 Feb 2008, Michael Kerrisk wrote: > Following up after quite some time: > > Davide Libenzi wrote: > > On Sat, 26 Jan 2008, Michael Kerrisk wrote: > > > >> On Jan 25, 2008 12:57 AM, Davide Libenzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > >>> >

Re: epoll and shared fd's

2008-02-26 Thread Bodo Eggert
Michael Kerrisk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > a) I did a > > s/internal kernel handle/open file description/ > > since that is the POSIX term for the internal handle. > > b) It seems to me that you text doesn't quite make the point explicit > enough. I've tried to rewrite it; could you please

Re: epoll and shared fd's

2008-02-26 Thread Michael Kerrisk
Following up after quite some time: Davide Libenzi wrote: > On Sat, 26 Jan 2008, Michael Kerrisk wrote: > >> On Jan 25, 2008 12:57 AM, Davide Libenzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, Pierre Habouzit wrote: >>> On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 09:10:18PM +, Davide Libenzi

Re: epoll and shared fd's

2008-02-26 Thread Michael Kerrisk
Following up after quite some time: Davide Libenzi wrote: On Sat, 26 Jan 2008, Michael Kerrisk wrote: On Jan 25, 2008 12:57 AM, Davide Libenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, Pierre Habouzit wrote: On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 09:10:18PM +, Davide Libenzi wrote: On Fri, 18

Re: epoll and shared fd's

2008-02-26 Thread Bodo Eggert
Michael Kerrisk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: a) I did a s/internal kernel handle/open file description/ since that is the POSIX term for the internal handle. b) It seems to me that you text doesn't quite make the point explicit enough. I've tried to rewrite it; could you please check:

Re: epoll and shared fd's

2008-02-26 Thread Davide Libenzi
On Tue, 26 Feb 2008, Michael Kerrisk wrote: Following up after quite some time: Davide Libenzi wrote: On Sat, 26 Jan 2008, Michael Kerrisk wrote: On Jan 25, 2008 12:57 AM, Davide Libenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, Pierre Habouzit wrote: On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at

Re: epoll and shared fd's

2008-02-26 Thread Michael Kerrisk
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 8:04 PM, Davide Libenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 26 Feb 2008, Michael Kerrisk wrote: Following up after quite some time: Davide Libenzi wrote: On Sat, 26 Jan 2008, Michael Kerrisk wrote: On Jan 25, 2008 12:57 AM, Davide Libenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: epoll and shared fd's

2008-02-26 Thread Davide Libenzi
On Tue, 26 Feb 2008, Michael Kerrisk wrote: Okay -- I'll look at it some more. I am however loathe to drop the term open file description, because POSIX uses, as well as a number of other Linux man pages by now. Heh, POSIX. Now doesn't take a genius to see that file description and file

Re: epoll and shared fd's

2008-01-25 Thread Michael Kerrisk
On Jan 25, 2008 12:57 AM, Davide Libenzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 09:10:18PM +, Davide Libenzi wrote: > > > On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > I just came across a

Re: epoll and shared fd's

2008-01-25 Thread Michael Kerrisk
On Jan 25, 2008 12:57 AM, Davide Libenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, Pierre Habouzit wrote: On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 09:10:18PM +, Davide Libenzi wrote: On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Pierre Habouzit wrote: Hi, I just came across a strange behavior of epoll

Re: epoll and shared fd's

2008-01-24 Thread Davide Libenzi
On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 09:10:18PM +, Davide Libenzi wrote: > > On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I just came across a strange behavior of epoll that seems to > > > contradict the documentation. Here is

Re: epoll and shared fd's

2008-01-24 Thread Pierre Habouzit
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 09:10:18PM +, Davide Libenzi wrote: > On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I just came across a strange behavior of epoll that seems to > > contradict the documentation. Here is what happens: > > > > * I have two processes P1 and P2, P1

Re: epoll and shared fd's

2008-01-24 Thread Pierre Habouzit
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 09:10:18PM +, Davide Libenzi wrote: On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Pierre Habouzit wrote: Hi, I just came across a strange behavior of epoll that seems to contradict the documentation. Here is what happens: * I have two processes P1 and P2, P1 accept()s

Re: epoll and shared fd's

2008-01-24 Thread Davide Libenzi
On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, Pierre Habouzit wrote: On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 09:10:18PM +, Davide Libenzi wrote: On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Pierre Habouzit wrote: Hi, I just came across a strange behavior of epoll that seems to contradict the documentation. Here is what happens:

Re: epoll and shared fd's

2008-01-18 Thread Davide Libenzi
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > Hi, > > I just came across a strange behavior of epoll that seems to > contradict the documentation. Here is what happens: > > * I have two processes P1 and P2, P1 accept()s connections, and send the > resulting file descriptors to P2 through

epoll and shared fd's

2008-01-18 Thread Pierre Habouzit
Hi, I just came across a strange behavior of epoll that seems to contradict the documentation. Here is what happens: * I have two processes P1 and P2, P1 accept()s connections, and send the resulting file descriptors to P2 through a unix socket. * P2 registers the received socket in his

epoll and shared fd's

2008-01-18 Thread Pierre Habouzit
Hi, I just came across a strange behavior of epoll that seems to contradict the documentation. Here is what happens: * I have two processes P1 and P2, P1 accept()s connections, and send the resulting file descriptors to P2 through a unix socket. * P2 registers the received socket in his

Re: epoll and shared fd's

2008-01-18 Thread Davide Libenzi
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Pierre Habouzit wrote: Hi, I just came across a strange behavior of epoll that seems to contradict the documentation. Here is what happens: * I have two processes P1 and P2, P1 accept()s connections, and send the resulting file descriptors to P2 through a unix