Re: [PATCH 1/2] kthread_create
From: Rusty Russell (rusty_at_rustcorp.com.au)
Date: 01/05/04
- Previous message: Dmitry Torokhov: "Re: [2.6.0-mm2] PM timer still has problems"
- In reply to: Davide Libenzi: "Re: [PATCH 1/2] kthread_create"
- Next in thread: Davide Libenzi: "Re: [PATCH 1/2] kthread_create"
- Reply: Davide Libenzi: "Re: [PATCH 1/2] kthread_create"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
To: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org> Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:38:47 +1100
In message <Pine.LNX.4.44.0401042100510.15831-100000@bigblue.dev.mdolabs.com> you write:
> Honestly I do not like playing with SIGCLD/waitpid for things that do not
> concern real task exits.
Well, it's pretty well documented.
> But I think it can be avoided, and actually I
> don't know why I did not think about this before. We don't need to return
> a struct task_struct* for kthread_create(). We can have:
>
> struct kthread_struct {
Nope. That's EXACTLY the kind of burden on the caller I wanted to
avoid if at all possible.
I just have decide whether to submit the wait one or the shared queue
one to Andrew....
Rusty.
-- Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Previous message: Dmitry Torokhov: "Re: [2.6.0-mm2] PM timer still has problems"
- In reply to: Davide Libenzi: "Re: [PATCH 1/2] kthread_create"
- Next in thread: Davide Libenzi: "Re: [PATCH 1/2] kthread_create"
- Reply: Davide Libenzi: "Re: [PATCH 1/2] kthread_create"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
