Re: [PATCH] lockd: convert reclaimer thread to kthread interface

[Jeff Layton]

On Tue, 04 Nov 2008 14:26:21 -0500
Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 13:42 -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > While we're on the subject of signals...
> > 
> > Do you have any thoughts/objections to just making the reclaimer thread
> > ignore them altogether? That would simplify the code a bit.
> 
> How does the administrator then get out of the situation where the
> server dies (permanently) in the middle of a reclaim?
> 

Erm...Reboot? :)

Ok, I'm convinced. I suppose that's a good enough argument for
continuing to allow SIGKILL. I guess the only change we need to make to
this patch for now is to remove the "memory leak" comment (unless there
is a leak and I'm just not seeing it).

-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
--
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/