[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090210235310.AEE3EFC35D@magilla.sf.frob.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 15:53:10 -0800 (PST)
From: Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] forget_original_parent: cleanup ptrace pathes
> Yes. But since I am paranoid, can we move the callsite later? I mean,
> I'd prefer to make a separate (trivial) patch which moves it.
Absolutely.
> Agreed, and probably forget_original_parent() can check empty(->children) too.
Yes, that might optimize (vs what we've always done) a case so common that
it actually makes a bit of difference in the grand scale. :-)
> Yes, nobody should at least. Nobody can find this task on its own list.
I was more worried about presumptions of all the linkage being complete
until release_task. But I don't see any actual thing to worry about.
> If you don't mind, I'd prefer to make these changes on top of [PATCH 3/4],
> reparent_thread-fix-a-zombie-leak-if-sbin-init-ignores-sigchld.patch
> (and this one should be dropped).
>
> Because that patch fixes the bug and changes the behaviour, while the
> discussed changes are cleanups.
I don't object to that patch first (and it might be fine for -stable even)
as long as these cleanups are really going in soon so that ->ptrace_entry
abuse disappears quickly.
Thanks,
Roland
--
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