[CRIU] Re: [PATCH 5/6] parasite: Don't assign error number on logfd

[Pavel Emelyanov]

On 02/14/2012 06:43 PM, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 06:20:07PM +0400, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
>> On 02/14/2012 05:42 PM, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
>>> In case if recv_fd failed we must not assign error
>>> number as logfd, it's bloody wrong. Moreover, never
>>> close descriptors which were not ever used or point
>>> to standart descriptors.
>>
>> Assigning some other task's 2nd file descriptor is wrong
>> too. It's better to keep it -1 to have NO output at all.
>>
> 
> Not at all. How pray tell you will be debuggin stuff when
> someone send you bug-report with no output from parasite?
> Having NO output is a way worse than having SOME output.

There will be NO some output with logfd == 2. If you fail to
send logfd to parasite, just abort the dump.

> 	Cyrill
>