Re: [PATCH] kthread: Rename user_mode_thread() to kmuser_thread()

[Huacai Chen]

Hi, all,

Friendly ping again?


Huacai

On Sun, Jul 23, 2023 at 10:13 PM Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi, Eric,
>
> On Tue, Jul 18, 2023 at 8:43 PM Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Hi, Luis,
> >
> > On Sat, Jul 1, 2023 at 7:25 AM Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sun, Jun 25, 2023 at 04:55:33PM +0800, Huacai Chen wrote:
> > > > Friendly ping?
> > >
> > > You want to cc the folks who Nacked your patch. Until then, this
> > > probably can't go further.
> > Thank you very much. Eric and Andrew are already in the CC list, so
> > add Thomas now.
> >
> > My brain is a little old-fashioned so I insisted that "a thread
> > without mm_struct should be a kernel thread" in the previous patch.
> > Unfortunately this makes Eric and Thomas unhappy, I'm very sorry for
> > that.
> >
> > During the discussion of the previous patch I know I made some
> > mistakes about some basic concepts, but I also found the name
> > "user_mode_thread()" is somewhat confusing. I think rename it to
> > kmuser_thread() is better, because:
> > 1, it identify init and umh as user threads;
> > 2, it points out that init and umh are special user threads that run
> > in kernel mode before loading a user program.
> >
> > Sorry for my rudeness again.
> Excuse me, but could you please tell me what your opinion is. In my
> opinion a typical user thread is created by
> pthread_create()/sys_clone(), it is better to distinguish typical user
> threads from init and umh.
>
> Huacai
> >
> > Huacai
> > >
> > >   Luis