Roland McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> can you see any danger to providing a /proc/self_task/ link? (or can you >> think of a better name/API/approach) > > That is a poor name to choose given /proc/self/task exists as something > else (just try writing a sentence comparing them and then read it aloud). > Probably /proc/self/task/self is what makes the most sense structurally. > I don't know if it matters to whatever use you are concerned with to have > two more steps in the lookup.
Well the only case it could matter is if you aren't allowed to access /proc/<tgid> which I think may actually be the current selinux behavior. So if we can't fix /proc/self we need to introduce /proc/task-self at the top level, just to be certain we don't run into weird cases like that. Otherwise /proc/self/task/self sounds like a wonderful suggestion. 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/
