From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id 106263858C3A; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 14:54:43 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 106263858C3A
From: "adhemerval.zanella at linaro dot org"
 <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: glibc-bugs@sourceware.org
Subject: [Bug libc/28730] Extend posix_spawnattr_* interface with more useful
 features
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2022 14:54:42 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: glibc
X-Bugzilla-Component: libc
X-Bugzilla-Version: unspecified
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: adhemerval.zanella at linaro dot org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at sourceware dot org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-28730-131-vBlY6I0HyX@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-28730-131@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-28730-131@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: glibc-bugs@sourceware.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Glibc-bugs mailing list <glibc-bugs.sourceware.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://sourceware.org/mailman/options/glibc-bugs>,
 <mailto:glibc-bugs-request@sourceware.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://sourceware.org/pipermail/glibc-bugs/>
List-Help: <mailto:glibc-bugs-request@sourceware.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://sourceware.org/mailman/listinfo/glibc-bugs>,
 <mailto:glibc-bugs-request@sourceware.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2022 14:54:43 -0000

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D28730

--- Comment #6 from Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zanella at linaro dot or=
g> ---
(In reply to Cristian Rodr=C3=ADguez from comment #5)
> So the best way way would be to use the pad space to introduce a an inter=
nal
> opaque struct  which we can modify or extend at will ? even with all
> implementation-defined leisure we still shouldn't break the ABI..

Yes, although I would first use the current space available and keep space =
for
a pointer to allow extend the functionaly.  Something like:

  typedef struct
  {
    short int __flags;
    pid_t __pgrp;
    sigset_t __sd;
    sigset_t __ss;
    struct sched_param __sp;
    int __policy;
    /* Add newer fields here.  */
    int __pad[N];
    void *__reserved/
  } posix_spawnattr_t;

So for posix_spawnattr_setpdeathsig_np it would be something like:

  typedef struct
  {
    short int __flags;
    pid_t __pgrp;
    sigset_t __sd;
    sigset_t __ss;
    struct sched_param __sp;
    int __policy;
    int __deathsignal;
    int __pad[M];
  } posix_spawnattr_t;

With M adjusted to keep the current size. For posix_spawnattr_setrlimit_np I
would do:

  typedef struct
  {
    short int __flags;
    pid_t __pgrp;
    sigset_t __sd;
    sigset_t __ss;
    struct sched_param __sp;
    int __policy;
    int __deathsignal;
    void *__resource;
    int __pad[M];
  } posix_spawnattr_t;

And internally '__resource' will be array of:

  struct posix_spawn_resource
  {
    int resource;
    struct rlimit64 rlim;
  }

(The rlimit has the LFS issue, so I think it shold be supported only for LFS
mode).

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.=