[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m11wit34fo.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com>
Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2007 10:20:27 -0600
From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Robin Holt <holt@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH 1/3] introduce SYS_CLONE_MASK
Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com> writes:
> I concur with Eric's assessment. Adding new magic bits to the generic
> clone path seems like a poor way to cope with kernel threads. I think
> it's better if kernel thread setup gets less like normal user process
> setup. I also agree with Eric that PPID of 0 is a very natural way for
> kernel threads to be displayed. We need to know more about the nature
> of the compatibility issue in procps to judge whether there is good
> reason to avoid changing it.
I just investigated the procps issue. Using init_task as the parent
nothing sticks out as being wrong in /proc.
Further when I modified pstree to accept 0 as it's starting pid (from
which all else would be rooted). All of the kernel threads showed up.
So if anything I it is a feature that kernel threads don't show up
by default in pstree (when PPID == 0). It isn't a subtle kernel bug.
Eric
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists