Re: Who changed /proc// in 2.6.0-test5-bk9?

Albert Cahalan
2003-10-03T00:17:09Z

On Thu, 2003-10-02 at 13:30, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> Albert Cahalan wrote:
>
> > To the user, maybe. To the admin, no. The admin uses
> > fuser and/or lsof to find out why he can't umount.
> > If those programs were thread-aware (they are not),
> > then they could take many minutes to run.
> >
> > In other words, stuff runs faster if we can ban this.
> > If not, please suggest a way to make fuser and lsof fast.
>
> Don't you see the flaw in your argumentation?

No. I mean "ban" like we ban CLONE_THREAD w/o CLONE_DETACHED.
Remember, the last stable release of the kernel (2.4.xx)
didn't have the ability to do CLONE_THREAD at all. So it
isn't as if real-world apps are depending on the ability
to do CLONE_THREAD w/o sharing file descriptors.

Got a legitimate must-have real-world use for it?