[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081224220358.GA3851@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2008 23:03:58 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: ebiederm@...ssion.com, roland@...hat.com, bastian@...di.eu.org,
daniel@...ac.com, xemul@...nvz.org, containers@...ts.osdl.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/7][v4] Define siginfo_from_ancestor_ns()
On 12/24, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
>
> Oleg Nesterov [oleg@...hat.com] wrote:
> | And, SI_ASYNCIO only matters when we send the signal to the subnamespace,
> | and in that case we will probably mangle .si_pid. So why don't we warn
> | when .si_code == SI_USER?
>
> I was wondering if I should there too :-) But what do you think ?
Well, if you ask me, I'd suggest to document the problems with
sigqueueinfo() and forget. Whatever we do, we can't be always
right.
Oleg.
--
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