lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Aug]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: kill -9 <pid of X>

Could we make the the death of init special? so that it leaves a ghost
behind that can at least prevent the folling oppses?

On Fri, 14 Aug 1998, MOLNAR Ingo wrote:

>
> On Thu, 13 Aug 1998, Rob Hagopian wrote:
>
> > I missed that message along the line... For pure cleanliness, I think that
> > 'kill -9 1' should be blocked in userspace tools. It does make much more
> > sense there.
>
> the kernel assumes on some places that a process _always_ has a parent. So
> it can always blindly dereference p->p_pptr. So if we kill init, we will
> immediatelly have a nasty set of oopses. It's also a matter of how mildly
> Linux/hardware bugs escalate when we get an oops. (if a very rare oops
> happens to hit init, the system dies horribly with a storm of oopses,
> possibly making the identification of the former oops harder)
>
> -- mingo
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html
>


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:44    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans