All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: "linux-os \(Dick Johnson\)" <linux-os@analogic.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, GLarson@analogic.com
Subject: Re: Kernel threads
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2007 01:00:23 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070308010023.7d19f420.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0703061101390.4403@chaos.analogic.com>

> On Tue, 6 Mar 2007 11:03:48 -0500 "linux-os \(Dick Johnson\)" <linux-os@analogic.com> wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> In linux-2.6.16.24, there is a problem with kernel threads
> and the aic79xx.c driver.
> 
> When nash is executing /initrd/linuxrc in the initial RAM disk
> during boot, it will be installing drivers. One driver, aic79xx.c
> creates some kernel threads that will exit after the initialization
> procedure. Actually the number of tasks depends upon the number
> of disks found as the driver spawns these tasks so initialization
> can occur in the background. The kernel tasks have been 'parented'
> to init. This may be fine for the real init, but nash and other
> shells receive the SIGCHLD signal and think that the fork()/exec()
> they have executed is complete. This makes nash insert drivers
> when the needed previous ones have not yet initialized. Also, when
> booting a shell, the signals from the exiting kernel tasks confuse
> it.
> 
> I think the top-level thread, kthread, should be reaping children
> instead of init, which in some cases isn't even running yet.
> 
> Any comments?
> 
> The current work-around of putting `sleep 10` in linuxrc after
> installing each driver is a hack of the worse kind. Especially,
> considering an Adaptec controller with many drives attached may
> require 'sleep 60'!
> 

ug.  I've always disliked the kernel's dependence upon init to reap exitted
kernel threads.  It Just Seems Wrong.

But I'd have thought that this is really wart in nash - Linux simply
expects init to reap dead kernel threads, and as a Linux implementation of
init, nash ought to not misbehave in the presence of this logstanding
kernel behaviour.



  reply	other threads:[~2007-03-08  9:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-03-06 16:03 Kernel threads linux-os (Dick Johnson)
2007-03-08  9:00 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-03-08 16:38 Oleg Nesterov
2007-03-09  0:31 ` Roland McGrath
2007-03-09 20:52   ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-03-09 21:38     ` Roland McGrath
2007-03-09 23:46       ` Oleg Nesterov
2003-04-25  7:53 Kernel Threads Romero, Miguel Angel
2002-11-20  9:36 kernel threads Madhavi
2002-04-12 17:07 Vahid Fereydunkolahi
2002-04-12 17:45 ` Masoud Sharbiani
2001-12-13  7:05 blesson paul
     [not found] <no.id>
2001-08-16 22:37 ` Alan Cox
2001-08-21 12:15   ` Christian Widmer
2001-08-16 22:23 Christian Widmer

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20070308010023.7d19f420.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=GLarson@analogic.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-os@analogic.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.