On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 04:00:42PM +0200, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 03:50:47PM +0200, Theo Buehler wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 03:01:26PM +0200, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > > When I added ibuf_get_fd() the idea was to make sure that ibuf_free() will
> > > close any fd still on the buffer. This way even if a fd is unexpectedly
> > > passed nothing will happen.
> > > 
> > > That code was disabled at start because userland was not fully ready. In
> > > particular rpki-client did not handle that well. All of this is to my
> > > knowledge fixed so there is no reason to keep the NOTYET :)
> > > 
> > > With this users need to use ibuf_fd_get() to take the fd off the ibuf.
> > > Code not doing so will break because ibuf_free() will close the fd which
> > > is probably still in use somewhere else.
> > 
> > Nothing in base outside of libutil seems to reach directly for the fd
> > (checked by compiling with that struct member renamed in the public
> > header).
> > 
> > The internal uses are addressed by this diff, so
> > 
> > ok tb
> > 
> > I can put the fd rename through a bulk to catch some ports in a couple
> > of days but I don't think there is a need to wait.
> 
> Thanks. Do we have a list of ports that use ibuf / imsg? 

I don't think so. The list of ports using libutil is rather long. my sql
is nonexistent but I get a few hundred.

Reply via email to