Re: [PATCH] change kernel threads to ignore signals instead of blocking them

Andrew Morton <[email protected]> writes:

> jffs2 actually wants its head examined.  W. T. F. does it think it's
> doing in there?

Good question, especially with respect to SIGHUP.

It is on my short list of very annoying kernel threads...

NFS and a few kernel threads others currently need a way to abort an
interruptible sleep when the are terminated.  Which has been a pain
finding a simple way to allow that without too much trouble.

I'm within about a day of having everything converted over to
kthreads, allowing me to kill daemonize.  Hopefully things I don't run
into any serious snags in testing...

Eric
-
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:
  • [PATCH] change kernel threads to ignore signals instead of blocking them
    • From: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] change kernel threads to ignore signals instead of blocking them
    • From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)
  • Re: [PATCH] change kernel threads to ignore signals instead of blocking them
    • From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [Announce] [patch] Modular Scheduler Core and Completely Fair Scheduler [CFS]
• Next by Date: Re: [Announce] [patch] Modular Scheduler Core and Completely Fair Scheduler [CFS]
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] change kernel threads to ignore signals instead of blocking them
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] change kernel threads to ignore signals instead of blocking them
• 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]