[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090205220656.GA7660@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 23:06:56 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@...hat.com>,
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] ptrace: reintroduce __ptrace_detach() as a callee
of ptrace_exit()
On 02/05, Roland McGrath wrote:
>
> > > Given its content, this function now better belongs in ptrace.c, I think.
> >
> > I don't completely agree... This helper imho has nothing to do with
> > ptracing, except it does __ptrace_unlink(). But OK, I will move it
> > if you prefer.
>
> Obviously where it goes is not a big deal. But I think it's clear that it
> has everything to do with ptrace and nothing to do with anything else.
> It resolves a situation that can only arise because of ptrace magic.
OK, OK, I will move it.
> > In that case we should export task_detached().
>
> Or just recognize that this trivial wrapper around == -1 has little
> value two lines away from a place where = -1 is done explicitly.
> Really, the "abstraction" is more confusing than not in this function, IMHO.
Well, yes. The only problem it is not easy to grep for this check
without a helper.
(And I still hope we can change the rules sometimes, I think there
is no good reason to have task_detached() or EXIT_DEAD tasks on
->children list. But this is offtopic.)
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