Subject: Re: Should FIOSETOWN convert pids to pgrps?
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Christos Zoulas <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 03/20/2003 14:39:29
In article <20030320124948.U580@snowdrop.l8s.co.uk>,
David Laight <email@example.com> wrote:
That sounds like the right solution to me.
>I've dug through all the sources again (fixing some man pages on the way).
>AFAICT nothing that uses tcsetpgrp() or TIOCSPGRP does async io.
>Indeed there are very few things that set FIOASYNC, O_ASYNC or FASYNC.
>(and one of them is ntp which doesn't like the current semantics).
>So it should be possible to:
>1) Pass the FIOSETOWN ioctl to the drivers, instead of converting it to
>2) Convert F_SETOWN to FIOSETOWN (fcntl to ioctl)
>3) Change everything except kern/tty.c to understand FIOSETOWN instead
> of TIOCSPGRP
>4) Make the tty code support TIOCSPGRP and FIOSETOWN as separate
Clarification: the TIOCSPGRP should deal with job control, and FIOSETOWN
with async i/o, right?
>5) Use some common functions (in either kern_sig.c and/or kern_proc.c)
> to process these requests.
> I don't think they can be completely taken out of the driver code,
> because the pgid/pid is a per-device item, not a per-file item.
> (and there is no reference back from the device to the file
> structure(s) ether.)
>If the code is done correctly, then the async io should grab a reference
>count against the pid/pgid in order to stop the pid being reallocated
>while the reference exists (only need one count per number).
>This would stop signals being sent to reallocated pids.