Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 15 Sep 2002 19:54:13 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 15 Sep 2002 19:54:13 -0400 Received: from neon-gw-l3.transmeta.com ([63.209.4.196]:3090 "EHLO neon-gw.transmeta.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 15 Sep 2002 19:54:12 -0400 Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2002 16:59:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds To: Matthew Wilcox cc: mingo@redhat.com, Subject: Re: problem with "Use CLONE_KERNEL for the common kernel thread flags"? In-Reply-To: <20020915225419.F10583@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1090 Lines: 27 On Sun, 15 Sep 2002, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > Seems to me like you missed something in your latest changeset: > > -#define CLONE_SIGNAL (CLONE_SIGHAND | CLONE_THREAD) > +#define CLONE_KERNEL (CLONE_FS | CLONE_FILES | CLONE_SIGHAND) > - kernel_thread(init, NULL, CLONE_FS | CLONE_FILES | CLONE_SIGNAL); > + kernel_thread(init, NULL, CLONE_KERNEL); > > init used to be spawned with CLONE_THREAD and no longer is. Was this > intentional? Yup. CLONE_THREAD has some new semantics these days, and is not necessarily at all what a kernel thread wants any more. It used to not matter at all, but these days it means that it gets put on the same thread group list as the parent, which means that it won't show up on the global list of processes any more (since it is considered a "subthread" of the thread group leader). Linus - 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/