[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090226223031.GA14477@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 23:30:31 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Chris Evans <scarybeasts@...il.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Don Howard <dhoward@...hat.com>,
Eugene Teo <eugene@...hat.com>,
Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...glemail.com>,
Tavis Ormandy <taviso@....lonestar.org>,
Vitaly Mayatskikh <vmayatsk@...hat.com>, stable@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] copy_process: fix CLONE_PARENT && ->exit_signal
interaction
On 02/26, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Thu, 26 Feb 2009, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > Really, how CLONE_PARENT + exit_signal==0 can be useful?
>
> Umm? For the reason I already stated?
But I can not understand that reason... As I said, the thread does not
go away if exit_signal == 0. Yes, the parent does not see it has a new
zombie, but why this is useful?
> > But because the current behaviour is just silly. Imho.
>
> So? If there are people using it, you calling it silly is immaterial.
>
> The fact is, it's an existing user space interface. We don't break them.
>
> > But of course, if this change can break the user-space applications, then
> > it should not be applied.
>
> That's the point. Nobody has shown that there aren't any users.
Yes, yes, sure...
I sent another patch, perhaps someone can comment. Or suggest something
else.
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