From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754684AbZBEWJv (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Feb 2009 17:09:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752678AbZBEWJm (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Feb 2009 17:09:42 -0500 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:37297 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752530AbZBEWJl (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Feb 2009 17:09:41 -0500 Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 23:06:56 +0100 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Roland McGrath Cc: Andrew Morton , Jerome Marchand , Denys Vlasenko , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] ptrace: reintroduce __ptrace_detach() as a callee of ptrace_exit() Message-ID: <20090205220656.GA7660@redhat.com> References: <20090129042920.GA5111@redhat.com> <20090205012334.9E60FFC381@magilla.sf.frob.com> <20090205143959.GA20953@redhat.com> <20090205203731.1E02BFC381@magilla.sf.frob.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090205203731.1E02BFC381@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 02/05, Roland McGrath wrote: > > > > Given its content, this function now better belongs in ptrace.c, I think. > > > > I don't completely agree... This helper imho has nothing to do with > > ptracing, except it does __ptrace_unlink(). But OK, I will move it > > if you prefer. > > Obviously where it goes is not a big deal. But I think it's clear that it > has everything to do with ptrace and nothing to do with anything else. > It resolves a situation that can only arise because of ptrace magic. OK, OK, I will move it. > > In that case we should export task_detached(). > > Or just recognize that this trivial wrapper around == -1 has little > value two lines away from a place where = -1 is done explicitly. > Really, the "abstraction" is more confusing than not in this function, IMHO. Well, yes. The only problem it is not easy to grep for this check without a helper. (And I still hope we can change the rules sometimes, I think there is no good reason to have task_detached() or EXIT_DEAD tasks on ->children list. But this is offtopic.) Oleg.