The changes can be found in the last 4 commits in git://iskren.info/wayland
repository, branch *mine* Regads, Iskren 2011/3/14 Kristian Høgsberg <[email protected]> > Great, that sounds like the right fix. Just update patches 1 and 4 to do > that and put it all in a branch and I'll pull it from there. > > Kristian > > On Mar 13, 2011, at 4:26 PM, Iskren Chernev <[email protected]> > wrote: > > According to the epoll(7) man page, closing a file descriptor removes it > from all epoll sets as long as it hasn't been copied (and other copies are > not closed): > > Q6 Will closing a file descriptor cause it to be removed from all > epoll sets automatically? > > A6 Yes, but . . . (explanation about copied fs via dup* etc) > > So maybe just closing the fds is the cleanest solution, given that only > library code can manage them and won't copy them. > > Regards, > Iskren > > On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 9:33 PM, Iskren Chernev <<[email protected]> > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Reply-To-All :) >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Iskren Chernev < <[email protected]>[email protected] >> > >> Date: 2011/3/13 >> Subject: Re: minor fixes in event-loop.c >> To: Kristian Høgsberg < <[email protected]>[email protected]> >> >> >> I fixed the "close fd" ones, but its not perfect: >> -- in what order should we do the epoll_ctl, close and free? >> -- what should we do if epoll_ctl is first and fails, or if close is first >> and fails (call the next one or return)? >> -- should we free if epoll_ctl of close fail? >> -- should we loop on close while it returns EINTR - the man page doesn't >> say weather SA_RESTART works for close. >> >> I think that close is unlikely to fail, because it is a special system fd. >> I'm not sure how often does epoll_ctl fail and what can be done about it -- >> there is no error returned from epoll_ctl that we might get unless there is >> something very wrong. >> >> It should be good enough for now :) >> >> Regards, >> Iskren >> >> PS.: I'll make a github account in the near future. So should I also send >> the patches with send-mail or only somehow send links to the revision in >> github? >> >> 2011/3/13 Kristian Høgsberg < <[email protected]>[email protected]> >> >>> On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Iskren Chernev >>> < <[email protected]>[email protected]> wrote: >>> > Some patches for event-loop.c -- the signal & timer fds were never >>> closed. >>> > In the future do you prefer patches standalone or archived? >>> >>> Looks like more good patches. Patches 1 and 4 close the fd before >>> passing it to epoll_ctl(), and I don't think that's how it's supposed >>> to work. It may or may not work depending on the implementation and >>> the man page doesn't state one way or the other. However, the obvious >>> safe approach is to just call epoll_ctl() before closing the fd. >>> >>> I prefer patches sent by git send-email, since they're easy to review >>> and discuss on the list, but for more than a couple of patches I also >>> would like a branch somewhere (github, gitorious etc) that I can just >>> pull if it all looks ok. >>> >>> Kristian >>> >> >> >> >
_______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
