On 12/04, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> I'm not sure what to make of this patchset, really. Oleg sounds
> unhappy and that's always a bad sign. And signals are rather ugly
> things. Oleg, can you please expand on your concerns?
I don't really know what can I say...
Yes the signals are ugly things,
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 3:55 AM Dave Martin wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 12:15:35AM +, Enke Chen wrote:
> > Hi, Dave:
> >
> > Thanks for your comments. You have indeed missed some of the prior reviews
> > and discussions. But that is OK.
> >
> > Please see my replies inline.
> >
> > On 11/
On Wed, 28 Nov 2018 16:15:35 -0800 Enke Chen wrote:
> Thanks for your comments. You have indeed missed some of the prior reviews
> and discussions. But that is OK.
This is why it is best to update the changelog in response to the
review discussion - if person A was wondering about something then
On 11/29, Dave Martin wrote:
>
> SIGCHLD + wait() is immune to this problem for other child status
> notifications (albeit with higher overhead).
>
> Unless I've missed something fundamental, signals simply aren't a
> reliable data transport
Yes. But I hope we are not going to implement WCOREDUMP.
Hi, Dave:
On 11/29/18 3:55 AM, Dave Martin wrote:
>> Indeed, I defined the signal code CLD_PREDUMP for SIGCHLD initially, but it
>> was removed after discussion:
>>
>> v3 --> v4:
>>
>> Addressed review comments from Oleg Nesterov, and Eric W. Biederman,
>> including:
>> o remove the definition CLD
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 12:15:35AM +, Enke Chen wrote:
> Hi, Dave:
>
> Thanks for your comments. You have indeed missed some of the prior reviews
> and discussions. But that is OK.
>
> Please see my replies inline.
>
> On 11/28/18 7:19 AM, Dave Martin wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 10:54
Hi, Dave:
Thanks for your comments. You have indeed missed some of the prior reviews
and discussions. But that is OK.
Please see my replies inline.
On 11/28/18 7:19 AM, Dave Martin wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 10:54:41PM +, Enke Chen wrote:
>> [Repost as a series, as suggested by Andrew
On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 10:54:41PM +, Enke Chen wrote:
> [Repost as a series, as suggested by Andrew Morton]
>
> For simplicity and consistency, this patch provides an implementation
> for signal-based fault notification prior to the coredump of a child
> process. A new prctl command, PR_SET_P
[Repost as a series, as suggested by Andrew Morton]
For simplicity and consistency, this patch provides an implementation
for signal-based fault notification prior to the coredump of a child
process. A new prctl command, PR_SET_PREDUMP_SIG, is defined that can
be used by an application to express
9 matches
Mail list logo
