From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0+0d542715679c15f37660+1339+infradead.org+hch@pentafluge.srs.infradead.org>
Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org (pentafluge.infradead.org
	[213.146.154.40])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(Client did not present a certificate)
	by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F6C1DDF12
	for <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>; Tue, 24 Apr 2007 18:38:02 +1000 (EST)
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 09:37:37 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc pseries eeh: Convert to kthread API
Message-ID: <20070424083737.GA26814@infradead.org>
References: <m1slawn9eb.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com>
	<11769695763104-git-send-email-ebiederm@xmission.com>
	<20070422123155.GF20763@infradead.org>
	<17965.39866.351929.349735@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <17965.39866.351929.349735@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com>
Cc: "<Andrew Morton" <akpm@osdl.org>, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
	containers@lists.osdl.org, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>

On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 03:55:06PM +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> Christoph Hellwig writes:
> 
> > The first question is obviously, is this really something we want?
> > spawning kernel thread on demand without reaping them properly seems
> > quite dangerous.
> 
> What specifically has to be done to reap a kernel thread?  Are you
> concerned about the number of threads, or about having zombies hanging
> around?

I'm mostly concerned about number of threads and possible leakage of
threads.  Linas already explained it's not a problem in this case,
so it's covered.