[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2152593.rzz5GT2AaC@tjmaciei-mobl4>
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 15:50:34 -0700
From: Thiago Macieira <thiago.macieira@...el.com>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] CLONE_FD: Task exit notification via file descriptor
On Monday 16 March 2015 15:36:16 Kees Cook wrote:
> And just so I understand the races here, what happens in CLONE_FD
> (without CLONE_AUTOREAP) case where the child dies, but the parent
> never reads from the CLONE_FD fd, and closes it (or dies)? Will the
> modes switch that late in the child's lifetime? (i.e. even though the
> details were written to the fd, they were never read, yet it'll still
> switch and generate a SIGCHLD, etc?)
What happens to a child that dies during the parent's lifetime but the parent
exits without reaping the child?
The same should happen, whatever that behaviour is.
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
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