From: yuan linyu <cug...@163.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 20:11:13 +0800
> From: yuan linyu <linyu.y...@alcatel-sbell.com.cn>
>
> SCM_MAX_FD can fully replace it.
>
> Signed-off-by: yuan linyu <linyu.y...@alcatel-sbell.com.cn>
I don't think so:
> @@ -341,7 +332,6 @@ struct scm_fp_list *scm_fp_dup(struct scm_fp_list *fpl)
> if (new_fpl) {
> for (i = 0; i < fpl->count; i++)
> get_file(fpl->fp[i]);
> - new_fpl->max = new_fpl->count;
> new_fpl->user = get_uid(fpl->user);
It's not set the SCM_MAX_FD here, it's set to whatever fpl->count is.
In other words, your patch breaks things.
