* Ulrich Drepper ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 23:05:04 -0800, Chris Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yeah, here it is. I refreshed it against a current kernel. It passes my > > same old test, where I select on /proc/<pid>/status fd in exceptfds. > > Looks certainly attractive to me. Nice small patch. How quickly > after the death of the process is proc_pid_flush() called?
I don't think it's called until it's reaped. > If this could go in and the futex stuff is handled, there is "only" > async I/O to handle. After that we could finally create a uniform > event mechanism at userlevel which binds all these events (I/O, > process/thread termination, sync primitives) together. Maybe support > for legacy sync primitives (SysV semaphores, msg queues) is needed as > well, don't know yet. Note that I assume that polling of POSIX > mqueues works as it did the last time I tried it. It should, AFAIK nothing there has changed. thanks, -chris -- Linux Security Modules http://lsm.immunix.org http://lsm.bkbits.net - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
