On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 11:01 -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 18:29 +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > On Maw, 2006-01-17 at 10:12 -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > > You do assign new pids, at least as far as the kernel is concerned.
> > > However, any processes that continue to run would get confused if their
> > > pid changed. You have to make sure that the tasks have a _consistent_
> > > view of which process is which pid.
> >
> > Don't reassign the pid at all. Keep task->container and do the job
> > explicitly. Most task searches for a pid are abstracted already and most
> > users of ->pid who try and use it for comparing two tasks for equality
> > or for keeping a task reference are already terminally racey and want
> > fixing anyway.
>
> Other than searches, there appear to be quite a number of drivers an
> subsystems that like to print out pids. I can't find any cases yet
> where these are integral to functionality, but I wonder what approach we
> should take.
those should obviously print out the REAL pid, not the application
pid ... so no changes needed.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
