lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Mar]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2.6.21-rc4] kernel/exit: Fix a comment and code contradiction
From
[Johannes please use replay-to-all to notify all readers]

On 2007-03-17 9:45:36 Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 17, 2007 at 08:21:32AM +0200, Ahmed S. Darwish wrote:
> > Comment in release_task() claims that group leader's parent process
> > is signalled only if it desires so, which is not true.
>
> AFAIS, `if it wants notification' means, it does not ignore its children
> via SIG_IGN als handler for SIGCHLD.
>

AFAIK, exit_signal = -1 means that the parent don't want to be signalled,
like what happenes when using CLONE_THREAD.

But it's even signalled in that case (after issuing a BUG):
BUG_ON(leader->exit_signal == -1);
do_notify_parent(leader, leader->exit_signal);

> do_notify_parent() checks if the parent wants to get informed about the
> child states.
>

Yes it does the check but it notifies the given task_struct anyway:

BUG_ON(sig == -1);
[ Continue parent notification normally ]
--
Ahmed S. Darwish
http://darwish.07.googlepages.com

-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-03-17 16:03    [W:0.044 / U:0.060 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site