From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030442AbWFJBYN (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jun 2006 21:24:13 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932616AbWFJBYN (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jun 2006 21:24:13 -0400 Received: from e31.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.149]:20171 "EHLO e31.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932615AbWFJBYM (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jun 2006 21:24:12 -0400 Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 20:23:14 -0500 From: "Serge E. Hallyn" To: "Eric W. Biederman" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.6.18 -mm merge plans Message-ID: <20060610012314.GA2378@sergelap.austin.ibm.com> References: <20060604135011.decdc7c9.akpm@osdl.org> <20060605144328.GA12904@sergelap.austin.ibm.com> <20060609232551.GA11240@sergelap.austin.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Quoting Eric W. Biederman (ebiederm@xmission.com): > "Serge E. Hallyn" writes: > > > Quoting Eric W. Biederman (ebiederm@xmission.com): > >> If you want to help with the bare pid to struct pid conversion I > >> don't have any outstanding patches, and getting that done kills > >> some theoretical pid wrap around problems as well as laying the ground > >> work for a simple pidspace implementation. > >> > >> Eric > > > > Is this the sort of thing you are looking for? Is this worthwhile for > > kernel_threads, or only for userspace threads - i.e. do we expect kernel > > threads to live? > > For kernel threads we should simply be able to use their task > struct. > > In this instance we have hit upon a different problem. Anything > using the kernel_thread API instead of the kthread api needs > to be updated. > > The basic problem is that for kernel_threads can show up > inside of containers. > > We can fix that by updating daemonize or we can simply > universally use the kthread api. Since the kernel_thread > api is deprecated because of these kinds of reasons > what really makes sense is to work on the transition > to the kthread api. Egads, I apologize. Apparently I was in a daze, as I'd forgotten that converting all kernel_thread users to kthread was something else we wanted to work towards, and which Christoph had explicitly asked for help with. > Ok a couple of comments. > > As I recall there are some pretty sane ways of going > from struct pid to a task_struct and then we can use things > like group_send_sig. Oh, you mean instead of doing kill_proc(struct pid->nr), which I guess was pretty braindead? :) Ok, futile as this may have seemed overall, I think it's helped me figure out what to actually do. thanks, -serge