Messages in this thread | | | From | (Eric W. Biederman) | Subject | Re: [patch 1/4] fs, proc: Introduce /proc/<pid>/task/<tid>/children entry v8 | Date | Tue, 24 Jan 2012 18:11:21 -0800 |
| |
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com> writes:
> (1/24/12 4:11 AM), Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 12:52:03AM -0800, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >>> Cyrill Gorcunov<gorcunov@gmail.com> writes: >>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 04:07:09PM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hmm. But userspace app will get eof, so frankly I don't see >>>>>> a problem here. Or maybe I miss something? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Userspace need to take care of whether there may be"\n" or not even >>>>> if read() returns EOF. >>>>> As an interface, it's BUG to say "\n" will be there if you're lucky!" >>>>> (*) I know script language can handle this but we shouldn't assume that. >>>>> >>>>> How about just remove "\n" at EOF ? I think it's unnecessary. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Sure thing, it's not a problem to remove it completely. >>> >>> Foolish question. Is there any reason why this is a file instead >>> of being the obvious directory full of symlinks? >>> >> >> How would these symlinks look like? "../../pid"? There were a conversation >> about such things (https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/12/2/142) but I suppose we >> were agree on children with pids as consensus. > > I couldn't find any agreement in this link. Suppose wrong url?
Now that you have reminded me of this thread. I can say that the link would need to look like ../../pid. Our children will always be thread group leaders, so we can safely point to the /proc/<pid> directories. So readlink would return ../../<pid> or however many dots are needed. Follow link could just warp us to that directory as it does for the other magic proc symlinks.
My feeling is that a children subdirectory would be a lot more useful than a simple file that lists the children.
Eric
| |