lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jan]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateWed, 7 Jan 2009 13:02:32 -0800
From"Ulrich Drepper" <>
SubjectRe: [RESEND][RFC PATCH v2] waitfd
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 12:53 PM, Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com> wrote:
> Do we really need another one for this?  How about using signalfd plus
> setting the child's exit_signal to a queuing (SIGRTMIN+n) signal instead of
> SIGCHLD?  It's slightly more magical for the userland process to know to do
> that (fork -> clone SIGRTMIN).  But compared to adding a syscall we don't
> really have to add, maybe better.

Since waitfd shouldn't consume the child termination notification
waitfd should be more widely usable than the wait*() interfaces.
I.e., it's not necessary to restrict the use to parents.  Any process
with the same UID should be allowed to call waitfd.  This would allow
some new user cases.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-01-07 22:05    [from the cache]
©2003-2008