[lkml]   [2009]   [Feb]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4/4] forget_original_parent: cleanup ptrace pathes
> It doesn't really hurt, but a bit ugly. Imho.


> How about below? Modulo comments and some other cleanups. For example,
> I think it is better to move the changing of ->real_parent into
> reparent_thread().

The exact split between reparent_thread and forget_original_parent (and
their names) never made much sense to me.

If ptrace_exit does its own lock/unlock, then it could move much earlier.
I'd be inclined to do it right before exit_signals(). But it should at
least short-circuit and not lock for list_empty(->ptraced), so we're not
adding a whole lock_irq/unlock_irq to the common case of no ptrace use.

> xxx = &p->real_parent->children;
> if (reparent_thread(father, p))
> xxx = &child_dead;
> list_move_tail(&p->sibling, xxx);;

I'd thought of this before. But I didn't mention it because I was afraid
to wonder what might care about the use of ->sibling. It really looks like
nothing does. This is clearly the clean and nice way to go if there is no
problem with it.

This change and moving ptrace_exit around should probably be separate patches.


 \ /
  Last update: 2009-02-11 00:25    [W:0.303 / U:6.672 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site