[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YNj4DItToR8FphxC@zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk>
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2021 22:13:32 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Michael Schmitz <schmitzmic@...il.com>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Richard Henderson <rth@...ddle.net>,
Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@...assic.park.msu.ru>,
Matt Turner <mattst88@...il.com>,
alpha <linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
linux-m68k <linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>,
Ley Foon Tan <ley.foon.tan@...el.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9] Refactoring exit
On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 10:45:23PM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> 13) there's bdflush(1, whatever), which is equivalent to exit(0).
> IMO it's long past the time to simply remove the sucker.
Incidentally, calling that from ptraced process on alpha leads to
the same headache for tracer. _If_ we leave it around, this is
another candidate for "hit yourself with that special signal" -
both alpha and m68k have that syscall, and IMO adding an asm
wrapper for that one is over the top.
Said that, we really ought to bury that thing:
commit 2f268ee88abb33968501a44368db55c63adaad40
Author: Andrew Morton <akpm@...eo.com>
Date: Sat Dec 14 03:16:29 2002 -0800
[PATCH] deprecate use of bdflush()
Patch from Robert Love <rml@...h9.net>
We can never get rid of it if we do not deprecate it - so do so and
print a stern warning to those who still run bdflush daemons.
Deprecated for 18.5 years by now - I seriously suspect that we have
some contributors younger than that...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists