From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757353AbZBWRCm (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Feb 2009 12:02:42 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755880AbZBWRC0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Feb 2009 12:02:26 -0500 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:49169 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755800AbZBWRCZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Feb 2009 12:02:25 -0500 Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 17:59:32 +0100 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Roland McGrath Cc: Andrew Morton , "Eric W. Biederman" , "Metzger, Markus T" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] move exit_ptrace() from forget_original_parent() to do_exit() Message-ID: <20090223165932.GB16294@redhat.com> References: <20090211211221.GA16857@redhat.com> <20090220022832.CA587FC2F7@magilla.sf.frob.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090220022832.CA587FC2F7@magilla.sf.frob.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 02/19, Roland McGrath wrote: > > > If we ever change exit_ptrace() to do the blocking calls, it makes > > sense to move it after exit_signals(). > > I'm not sure I understand this comment. I guess you just mean that if we > block, we should be sure to do the exit_signals() pass-the-pending-buck > work afterwards. Another reason: it is better to set PF_EXITING asap, before doing something which can block/etc. PF_EXITING means that complete_signal()->wants_signal() will not pick us as ->curr_target. > OK. But I think we want it after exit_signals anyway so > that ptrace_traceme() can check PF_EXITING (cf 1/4 review). Yes, you are right. > Also, I think this patch should be the very last of the series. Agreed. Oleg.