Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 2 Jan 2004 08:58:09 -0800 (PST) | From | Davide Libenzi <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/2] kthread_create |
| |
On Fri, 2 Jan 2004, Rusty Russell wrote:
> In message <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312311935080.5831-100000@bigblue.dev.mdolabs.com> yo > u write: > > On Wed, 31 Dec 2003, Rusty Russell wrote: > > > > > But an alternate implementation would be to have a "kthread" kernel > > > thread, which would actually be parent to the kthread threads. This > > > means it can allocate and clean up, since it catches *all* thread > > > deaths, including "exit()". > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > Did you take a look at the stuff I sent you? I'll append here with a > > simple comment (this goes over you bits). > > Yes, but I think it's a really bad idea, as I said before. > > Anyway, Here's a version which fixes the issues raised by Andrew by > doing *everything* in keventd, uses waitpid(), and uses signals for > communication (except for the case of init failing).
Rusty, you still have to use global static data when there is no need. I like this version better though ;)
- Davide
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |