[lkml]   [2002]   [Sep]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [patch] thread-exec-2.5.34-B1, BK-curr
On Sun, 2002-09-15 at 19:38, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Sep 2002, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > i dont like those semantics either - will verify whether thread-specific
> > exec() works via a helper thread (or vfork) - it really should.
> As long as it works with something sane (and vfork() is sane), I'm happy
> with the posix behaviour by default. After all, the execve() really _does_
> need to "de-thread" anyway, and if we need to make that explicit (with the
> vfork()) then that's fine.

An execve can be setuid code so it really represents a whole new
security domain. Thats why the thread signal protection refuses to let
strange child exit signals cross it.

There is code that depends on clone()/exec() not killing other threads
in the group - some threaded web servers for example.

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

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:28    [W:0.909 / U:1.732 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site