On 10/05, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > > On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 04:32:08 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > [...] > > As for user-space, I don't really understand the second test-case, > > this again means I don't understand the supposed behaviour. > > The high level goal is described at its top. Users expect that if they run > `gstack PID' or `gcore PID' the target PID will be absolutely in the same > state as before gstack/gcore. > > That means it will keep both whether it was / was not stopped and also any > possible existing / non-existing pending signal for a possible future > waitpid() from its real (non-ptrace) parent PID. > > Another question whether technically what it does is right but this high level > goal is hopefully valid.
Yes, agreed, this part is clear. Oleg.
