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    [W:0.019 / U:1.356 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site