public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jb at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug libfortran/48587] New: Avoid exhausting unit number with NEWUNIT= Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 07:40:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-48587-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48587 Summary: Avoid exhausting unit number with NEWUNIT= Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement Priority: P3 Component: libfortran AssignedTo: unassigned@gcc.gnu.org ReportedBy: jb@gcc.gnu.org As was recently pointed out by Tobias Burnus in a thread on comp.lang.fortran, the current implementation of NEWUNIT= doesn't reuse unit numbers. Hence it's possible that a program might exhaust the available unit numbers (this requires that the program repeatedly closes and reopens files, as OS's have limits on the number of file descriptors a process may have concurrently opened, typically 1024 or something like that) Currently there is just a (mutex protected) static variable which is decremented for each time an OPEN statement with NEWUNIT= is issued, with a wraparound check that generates an error if wraparound is detected. IMHO an elegant solution would be to just reuse the kernel provided file descriptor. E.g. int fd = open(...); if (fd == -1) { /* Handle error... */ } new_unit_number = -fd; This should work because a successful open() will always return a positive fd number (see http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/basedefs/V1_chap03.html ), and the kernel takes care of reusing file descriptor numbers of closed files.
next reply other threads:[~2011-04-13 7:40 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2011-04-13 7:40 jb at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2011-04-13 10:20 ` [Bug libfortran/48587] " burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-04-13 10:47 ` jb at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-04-13 18:59 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-04-14 8:12 ` jb at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-04-15 9:13 ` jb at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-04-19 13:41 ` fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-03-03 22:19 ` jb at gcc dot gnu.org
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=bug-48587-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).