From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thiago Macieira Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] CLONE_FD: Task exit notification via file descriptor Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 15:50:34 -0700 Message-ID: <2152593.rzz5GT2AaC@tjmaciei-mobl4> References: <2381173.VxaIO6vGG3@tjmaciei-mobl4> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-api-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Kees Cook Cc: Josh Triplett , Al Viro , Andrew Morton , Andy Lutomirski , Ingo Molnar , Oleg Nesterov , "Paul E. McKenney" , "H. Peter Anvin" , Rik van Riel , Thomas Gleixner , Michael Kerrisk , LKML , Linux API , "linux-fsdevel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , "x86-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org" List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On Monday 16 March 2015 15:36:16 Kees Cook wrote: > And just so I understand the races here, what happens in CLONE_FD > (without CLONE_AUTOREAP) case where the child dies, but the parent > never reads from the CLONE_FD fd, and closes it (or dies)? Will the > modes switch that late in the child's lifetime? (i.e. even though the > details were written to the fd, they were never read, yet it'll still > switch and generate a SIGCHLD, etc?) What happens to a child that dies during the parent's lifetime but the parent exits without reaping the child? The same should happen, whatever that behaviour is. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center