[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240131-engel-entern-9b5c96659948@brauner>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2024 15:39:00 +0100
From: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ho.pizza>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/1] pidfd: implement PIDFD_THREAD flag for
pidfd_open()
On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 03:12:04PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Before I forget this...
>
> After this patch we can easily add another feature, pidfd_poll()
> can add, say, POLLHUP to poll_flags if the pid is "dead".
>
> So the user can do
>
> poll(pidfd, { .revents = POLLHUP });
>
> and it will block until release_task() is called and this pid is
> no longer in use (pid_task() == NULL).
>
> Do you think this can be useful?
Yeah, I think this is something that people would find useful. IIUC, it
would essentially allow them to do things like wait until a task has
been waited upon which for service managers is very useful information.
---
Btw, bigger picture for a second. You probably haven't kept track of
this but the fact that we got pidfds - thanks a lot to your review and
help - has made quite a huge difference in userspace. Since we last did
any meaningful work we got:
* systemd completely relying on pidfds to manage services to guard
against any pid races.
* Extended dbus to allow authentication via pidfds.
* Extended policy kit to enable secure authentication of processes via pidfds.
* Language support for pidfds: Go, Rust etc.
* An endless number of tools that added support for them.
* glibc support for pidfd apis.
There's a bunch more. That literally obliterated whole bug classes.
I think with PIDFD_THREAD support it might make it interesting to use it
for some pthread management as well.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists