Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 28 Aug 2000 09:20:49 -0600 | From | yodaiken@fsmlabs ... | Subject | Re: SCO: "thread creation is about a thousand times faster than |
| |
On Mon, Aug 28, 2000 at 05:10:30PM +0200, Marc Lehmann wrote: > On Mon, Aug 28, 2000 at 07:34:00AM -0600, yodaiken@fsmlabs.com wrote: > > Otherwise, there seems room in the POSIX spec to wriggle out of the STOP > > requirement. > > That might be the case, but my concern is not POSIX but security, an > orthogonal concept. Lax handling of STOP is a big security problem, even > with the process-only model (see the many programs that suffice to survive > KILL or SOTP for some time), and with threads it only gets easier.
You can't rely on signals timing anyway -- that is quite clear in the spec and in the implementation. Especially on a SMP machine, STOP has weak semantics and I don't see how to imrove it.
-- --------------------------------------------------------- Victor Yodaiken Finite State Machine Labs: The RTLinux Company. www.fsmlabs.com www.rtlinux.com
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |