linux-kernel - Re: process exception

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <AANLkTikL_+_STupmVyD6pLKrTETmGQ=v0MMMWW=nq-UO@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 31 Jan 2011 14:36:19 -0800
From:	Manish Katiyar <mkatiyar@...il.com>
To:	Sri Ram Vemulpali <sri.ram.gmu06@...il.com>
Cc:	Kernel-newbies <kernelnewbies@...linux.org>,
	linux-kernel-mail <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: process exception

On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 2:31 PM, Sri Ram Vemulpali
<sri.ram.gmu06@...il.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
>  This is regarding segment fault. Is there any feature that we can
> allow kernel to kill only the thread that generate seg fault rather
> than killing whole process in which it is running. Why is that we did
> not implement in such way. Is there any specific reason. Thanks in
> advance for explanation.

What is the guarantee that whole process isn't hosed up ? For example
let's say a global pointer became NULL and we died accessing it from 1
of the threads. I'm not sure if it would be better to have 'N'
coredumps as opposed to just 1.


-- 
Thanks -
Manish
--
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/