Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Bill Davidsen <[email protected]> writes:
As long as the original parent is preserved for getppid(). There are programs
out there which communicate between the parent and child with signals, and if
the original parent dies, it undesirable to have the child getppid() and start
sending signals to a program not expecting them. Invites undefined behavior.
Then the programs are broken. getppid is defined to change if the process
is reparented to init.
The short answer is that kthreads don't do this so it doesn't matter.
But user programs are NOT broken, currently getppid returns either the
original parent or init, and a program can identify init. Reparenting to
another pid would not be easily noted, and as SUS notes, no values are
reserved to error. So there's no way to check, and no neeed for
kthreads, I was prematurely paranoid.
Presumably user processes will still be reparented to init so that's not
an issue. Since there's no atomic signal_parent() the ppid could change
between getppid() and signal(), but that's never actually been a problem
AFAIK.
Related: Is there a benefit from having separate queues for original
children of init and reparented (to init) tasks? Even in a server would
there be enough to save anything?
--
Bill Davidsen <[email protected]>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
-
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]
