Re: [PATCH] Make POSIX locks compatible with the NPTL thread model

[Chris Wright]

* Trond Myklebust (trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> At some point in 2.5.x we introduced the NPTL thread model at the kernel
> level, and hence redefined the idea of a process: a process appears
> currently to be defined as one or more threads with the same tgid...
> However we failed to completely update the POSIX locking code to reflect
> that change: currently, the POSIX locking code defines the process to be
> a set of one or more threads with the same tgid and a shared file
> table...
> 
> As a result we end up with abominations like the steal_locks() function
> that is required in order to move the locks from from one file table to
> another on exec etc.

Just ran some quick tests to verify this patch still works fine with
execve() after plain CLONE_FILES as well as full CLONE_THREAD.  Passed
my tests.  Nice to see the steal_locks bit go.  However, without this
patch (only the prior one, I'm getting an oops).

thanks,
-chris
-- 
Linux Security Modules     http://lsm.immunix.org     http://lsm.bkbits.net
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/