> The matter is: I don't agree the
> signal behaviour for clones sharing its pid's.
The impression I've got from the code is that CLONE_PID isn't supposed
to have any particular semantics, as long as it doesn't expose
security holes (which it diesn't seem to). I assume sensible semantics
were supposed to be implemented at a later date, but no-one has got
round to it. The obvious user-space semantics are those for POSIX
thread signals, but it isn't quite so obvious which kernel additions
would be most useful for a low-overhead user-space implementation.
> [snip]
> I think the wrong step is allowing the clones to share its pid's.
I suspect no-one has actually made real-world use of CLONE_PID from
user-space. It is however used inside the kernel (creating the idle
task for each processor on SMP, which should all have the same pid of
0).
Dave Wragg
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/