[lkml]   [2000]   [Nov]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: kernel_thread bogosity
On Thu, Nov 23, 2000 at 11:23:33PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> You see? Kernel_thread does not check is sys_clone() worked! Aha,

"=&a" (retval)

> caller is responsible for that, but init/main.c does not seem too
> carefull. Maybe kernel_thread should at least print a warning?

If clone fails during start_kernel that's the last of your problems so nobody
cared. If you want to add a check on the retval go ahead, that's right indeed.

> Plus, can someone explain me why it does not need to setup %%ecx with
> either zero or address of stack?

Not necessary because a kernel thread never exit from kernel.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:47    [W:0.040 / U:2.272 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site