[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110818142508.GA30959@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 16:25:08 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Lennart Poettering <mzxreary@...inter.de>
Cc: Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-man@...r.kernel.org,
roland@...k.frob.com, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: +
prctl-add-pr_setget_child_reaper-to-allow-simple-process-supervision
.patch added to -mm tree
On 08/18, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>
> On Wed, 17.08.11 15:45, Oleg Nesterov (oleg@...hat.com) wrote:
>
> > You should mark the whole process as sub-reaper, not a single thread
> > which does prctl(). The parent/child relationship is process-wide.
>
> Hmm, how would we implement this best? Would it be sufficient to follow
> group_leader pointer to set/get the flag,
You can mark task->group_leader. Or, probably better, task->signal.
INHO, the best option is SIGNAL_SUB_REAPER in signal->flags. But this
is not possible until we cleanup the usage of signal->flags.
> and to follow real_parent
OOPS. I simly can't understand how I managed to miss this. Of course,
in any case you should follow ->real_parent, not ->parent!
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