Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/5] Task references..

Quoting Eric W. Biederman ([email protected]):
> 
> At the moment I am going to say thanks for the comments.
> 
> So far no one has said hey this is what I have been looking for
> and pid wrap around in the kernel is a very bad thing, thanks
> for solving my problem.
> 
> Currently this feels like overkill so I am going to shelve this
> approach for now.

Ok, then let me jump in belatedly and say I think this is a good
thing, and it will solve a problem we all (involved in this thread)
will face shortly.

And kudos for (a) a very nice, clean patchset, and (b) solving the
fowner/signal problem!

I think this would be a very good thing to go in.

thanks,
-serge
-
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/

---

• References:
  • [RFC][PATCH 0/5] Task references..
    • From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)
  • Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/5] Task references..
    • From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)

• Prev by Date: Re: Check for references to discarded sections during build time
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 1/5] cpuset memory spread basic implementation
• Previous by thread: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/5] Task references..
• Next by thread: [PATCH] Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt: Clarification
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]