Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030344AbWAXGEW (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jan 2006 01:04:22 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030348AbWAXGEV (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jan 2006 01:04:21 -0500 Received: from smtpout.mac.com ([17.250.248.44]:55747 "EHLO smtpout.mac.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030344AbWAXGEV (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jan 2006 01:04:21 -0500 In-Reply-To: <787b0d920601231939x1cf519e1x540316c06973de58@mail.gmail.com> References: <787b0d920601221636h7acbb891wd52b88e0aea75aaf@mail.gmail.com> <5AB1D65D-8F03-4CDF-9847-D75143EC0A9C@mac.com> <787b0d920601221717v460283eclc72380ae541d7fef@mail.gmail.com> <787b0d920601231939x1cf519e1x540316c06973de58@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v746.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <55FF6D56-A5F8-47E8-89F7-E51BB22B22FF@mac.com> Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Kyle Moffett Subject: Re: anon unions are cool Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 01:04:16 -0500 To: Albert Cahalan X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.746.2) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1554 Lines: 38 On Jan 23, 2006, at 22:39, Albert Cahalan wrote: >> Then there is the other weird side where only the leaders of >> thread groups are placed in sessions and process groups. > > That's not at all weird. It fits perfectly with the use of the tgid > as the POSIX PID and the use of the "pid" (ugh) as the POSIX thread > ID. > > Aside from POSIX just being arguably weird, the only weird things > here are: > > 1. kill() not returning errno=ESRCH when it should > 2. the name "pid" being used oddly in the kernel And actually, my use of the task->pid member was correct. The "pid virtualization" patches are virtualizing not only the process IDs, but the thread IDs as well (the whole point is to provide completely unique PID/TID spaces, so everything needs to be virtualized). In any case, it was just a poorly chosen example (because that particular virtualization bit was not necessary). I agree with you that the kernel's behavior is weird, but it has its reasons and a lot of history. If you think it's that important, a cleanup patch (assuming it's not too intrusive) would probably be welcomed. Cheers, Kyle Moffett -- I lost interest in "blade servers" when I found they didn't throw knives at people who weren't supposed to be in your machine room. -- Anthony de Boer - 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/