Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] exec: Cleanup exec from a non thread group leader. | From | (Eric W. Biederman) | Date | Mon, 30 Jan 2006 13:27:30 -0700 |
| |
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru> writes:
> Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> >> And for good measure we set the thread group leaders >> exit_signal to -1 so it will self reap. We are actually >> past the point where that matters but it can't hurt, and >> it might help someday. >> ... >> leader->exit_state = EXIT_DEAD; >> + leader->exit_signal = -1; > > I disagree. The leader is already practically reaped, it is EXIT_DEAD. > I think this change will confuse the reader who will try to understand > why do we need this subtle assignment.
Six of one half dozen of the other. It doesn't matter so I don't care.
>> void switch_exec_pids(task_t *leader, task_t *thread) >> { >> - __detach_pid(leader, PIDTYPE_PID); >> - __detach_pid(leader, PIDTYPE_TGID); >> - __detach_pid(leader, PIDTYPE_PGID); >> - __detach_pid(leader, PIDTYPE_SID); >> - >> - __detach_pid(thread, PIDTYPE_PID); >> - __detach_pid(thread, PIDTYPE_TGID); >> - >> - leader->pid = leader->tgid = thread->pid; >> - thread->pid = thread->tgid; >> - >> - attach_pid(thread, PIDTYPE_PID, thread->pid); >> - attach_pid(thread, PIDTYPE_TGID, thread->tgid); >> + detach_pid(thread, PIDTYPE_PID); >> + thread->pid = leader->pid; >> + attach_pid(thread, PIDTYPE_PID, thread->pid); >> attach_pid(thread, PIDTYPE_PGID, thread->signal->pgrp); >> - attach_pid(thread, PIDTYPE_SID, thread->signal->session); >> - list_add_tail(&thread->tasks, &init_task.tasks); > > The last deletion is wrong, I beleive.
list_add_tail is duplicate code. It is already present in the caller. So it is noise and confusing to leave it here. But you already noted that in the following email.
>> + attach_pid(thread, PIDTYPE_SID, thread->signal->session); >> >> - attach_pid(leader, PIDTYPE_PID, leader->pid); >> - attach_pid(leader, PIDTYPE_TGID, leader->tgid); >> - attach_pid(leader, PIDTYPE_PGID, leader->signal->pgrp); >> - attach_pid(leader, PIDTYPE_SID, leader->signal->session); >> + detach_pid(leader, PIDTYPE_PID); >> + detach_pid(leader, PIDTYPE_TGID); >> + detach_pid(leader, PIDTYPE_PGID); >> + detach_pid(leader, PIDTYPE_SID); >> } > > I think most of detach_pid()s could be replaced with __detach_pid(), > this will save unneccesary pid_hash scanning
Actually 90% of the point was to remove the need for __detach_pid. But you are right __detach_pid would be safe and we know that because of the ordering. At the same time because we are not the last reference the code will never do that.
I need to relook at this. To not conflict with your code some of the detach_pids need to be removed so we don't unhash things twice.
Eric - 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/
| |