linux-kernel - Re: init's children list is long and slows reaping children.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20070406202118.GA28466@elte.hu>
Date:	Fri, 6 Apr 2007 22:21:18 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	Robin Holt <holt@....com>, Chris Snook <csnook@...hat.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: init's children list is long and slows reaping children.


* Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru> wrote:

> Probably it is I who missed something :)
> 
> But why can't we do both changes? I think it is just ugly to use init 
> to reap the kernel thread. Ok, wait4() can find zombie quickly if we 
> do the ->children split. But /sbin/init could be swapped out, we still 
> need to deliver SIGCHLD, etc.
> 
> And I personally agree with Linus, it is nice to hide the kernel 
> threads from /sbin/init (or whatever) completely.

yeah, they should all be made auto-reap - nobody is really interested in 
their wait4()-driven completion. (any completion they do is via other 
mechanisms)

	Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/