linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Only send pdeath_signal when getppid changes.

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: <m1ejmsxh33.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com>
Date:	Tue, 10 Apr 2007 11:41:20 -0600
From:	ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Robin Holt <holt@....com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Chris Snook <csnook@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Jack Steiner <steiner@...ricas.sgi.com>,
	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>, acahalan@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Only send pdeath_signal when getppid changes.

Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru> writes:

> On 04/10, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> 
>> So this patch fixes the pdeath_signal behaviour only sending a signal
>> when the results of getppid would change.
>
> Don't get me wrong, I personally like this patch very much. However,

Good point.

I guess we have a simple question.
Does a parent death signal make most sense between separately written programs?

   If so this patch is a bug fix.

Does a parent death signal make most sense between processes that are part of
a larger program.

   If so there is little point to this patch.

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/