[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190430123901.GD23020@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2019 14:39:01 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Kevin Easton <kevin@...rana.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com>,
"Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <lkml@...ux.net>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
Daniel Colascione <dancol@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: RFC: on adding new CLONE_* flags [WAS Re: [PATCH 0/4] clone: add
CLONE_PIDFD]
On 04/29, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> Linux vfork() is very much a real vfork(). What do you mean?
Yes, but I am wondering if man vfork should clarify what "child terminates"
actually means. I mean, the child can do clone(CLONE_THREAD) + sys_exit(),
this will wake the parent thread up before the child process exits or execs.
I see nothing wrong, but I was always curious whether it was designed this
way on purpose or not.
Oleg.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists