[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071208183800.GA9940@tv-sign.ru>
Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2007 21:38:00 +0300
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] will_become_orphaned_pgrp: we have threads
p->exit_state != 0 doesn't mean this process is dead, it may have sub-threads.
However, the new "p->exit_state && thread_group_empty(p)" check is not correct
either, this is just the temporary hack. Perhaps we can just remove this check,
but I don't understand orphaned process groups magic. At all. However, I think
exit_notify() is obviously and completely wrong wrt this helper.
Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
--- PT/kernel/exit.c~4_orphaned_pgrp 2007-12-06 18:06:09.000000000 +0300
+++ PT/kernel/exit.c 2007-12-07 20:25:40.000000000 +0300
@@ -219,9 +219,9 @@ static int will_become_orphaned_pgrp(str
int ret = 1;
do_each_pid_task(pgrp, PIDTYPE_PGID, p) {
- if (p == ignored_task
- || p->exit_state
- || is_global_init(p->real_parent))
+ if ((p == ignored_task) ||
+ (p->exit_state && thread_group_empty(p)) ||
+ is_global_init(p->real_parent))
continue;
if (task_pgrp(p->real_parent) != pgrp &&
task_session(p->real_parent) == task_session(p)) {
--
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