[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87lgks7z0p.fsf@xmission.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2017 15:32:54 -0500
From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jürg Billeter <j@...ron.ch>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
Filipe Brandenburger <filbranden@...gle.com>,
David Wilcox <davidvsthegiant@...il.com>, hansecke@...il.com,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH] prctl: add PR_[GS]ET_PDEATHSIG_PROC
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> writes:
> On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 12:30 PM, Eric W. Biederman
> <ebiederm@...ssion.com> wrote:
>>
>> We never signal the orignal parent. We signal the child that
>> requested the pdeath_signal when the original parent dies.
>
> Yeah, I keep making that mistake, because I always confuse this with
> the exit_signal handling.
>
> Just mentally kick me next time I do that: "Christ, Linus, not
> *again*! Take your damn meds"
>
> Anyway, it's more the "another confusing and fragile special case that
> will probably not be used very widely and cause confusion because it
> lacks any test coverage" thing I worry about most.
Agreed. That makes a more general solution perferable.
Eric
Powered by blists - more mailing lists