Re: [RESEND][RFC PATCH v2] waitfd

[Ulrich Drepper]

On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 12:53 PM, Roland McGrath <roland@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Do we really need another one for this?  How about using signalfd plus
> setting the child's exit_signal to a queuing (SIGRTMIN+n) signal instead of
> SIGCHLD?  It's slightly more magical for the userland process to know to do
> that (fork -> clone SIGRTMIN).  But compared to adding a syscall we don't
> really have to add, maybe better.

Since waitfd shouldn't consume the child termination notification
waitfd should be more widely usable than the wait*() interfaces.
I.e., it's not necessary to restrict the use to parents.  Any process
with the same UID should be allowed to call waitfd.  This would allow
some new user cases.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/