Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] make vfork killable
From: Oleg Nesterov
Date: Mon Aug 15 2011 - 15:45:48 EST
On 08/13, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Oleg.
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 07:55:50PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > an alternative approach
> > > could be handling vfork waiting as a type of job control stop.
> > Well, I didn't see the code, but to be honest this doesn't look
> > like a good idea to me. Firstly, personally I do not think this
> > has something to do with the job control stop.
> > And, to me sys_restart_syscall() looks like the very natural
> > approach, and simple.
> I've been playing with this and it does a bit further than
> implementation simplicity. Currently, we have three different modes
> of stopping a task.
> * Regular job control and ptrace.
> * vfork wait.
> * cgroup freeze.
I still can't understand what exactly you have in mind.
And to me vfork() is closer to nanoslep() than to cgroup_freezer.
(As for cgroup_freezer, I agree it would be nice to reimplent it
in any case).
> The downside is that that wouldn't work with cgroup freeze at
> all - there's no syscall to restart.
Sure. Still I don't understand why restart is not suitable for vfork
and why it would be better to unify freezer/vfork.
OK. Let's discuss this later, I hope you will cc me ;)
But what do you think about this series? It is simple, it doesn't
play with restarts. In some sense it even simplifies the code because
it removes one user of ->vfork_done. I don't think these patches can
complicate the further changes you are going to do.
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/