New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
init: Fixes for file descriptor accounting #27539
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
init: Fixes for file descriptor accounting #27539
Conversation
The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers. Code CoverageFor detailed information about the code coverage, see the test coverage report. ReviewsSee the guideline for information on the review process.
If your review is incorrectly listed, please react with 👎 to this comment and the bot will ignore it on the next update. ConflictsReviewers, this pull request conflicts with the following ones:
If you consider this pull request important, please also help to review the conflicting pull requests. Ideally, start with the one that should be merged first. |
856a770
to
f9f1460
Compare
f9f1460
to
bbad166
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Concept ACK
I think it would be very helpful to add comments to explain what is going on. See my accidentally duplicate PR for some suggestions: #27730.
#ifdef USE_POLL | ||
int fd_max = nFD; | ||
#else | ||
int fd_max = FD_SETSIZE; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Needs an explanation of why it is ok to take FD_SETSIZE
completely out of the equation in the commit description.
Concept ACK First three commits look good, but the last one needs more descriptions and comments as mentioned by fjahr. |
🤔 There hasn't been much activity lately and the CI seems to be failing. If no one reviewed the current pull request by commit hash, a rebase can be considered. While the CI failure may be a false positive, the CI hasn't been running for some time, so there may be a real issue hiding as well. A rebase triggers the latest CI and makes sure that no silent merge conflicts have snuck in. |
Co-authored-by: tryphe <tryphe@noreply.github.com>
And fix the amount of descriptors requested Co-authored-by: tryphe <tryphe@noreply.github.com>
bbad166
to
44872b3
Compare
This was rebased fairly recently, but you have not addressed this open comment #27539 (comment) . Are you still working on this? |
This rebases and revises #16003 for clarity of review.
Aims to fix #18911.