Not that I should chime in here BUT.. >From a management standpoint, it is a PITA whether it is technically correct or not. You literally have to reboot the machine to stop and start the client on Solaris.
Just out of curiousity, how many non-threaded kernel systems are we currently supporting now? Is this just more legacy code that could be deprecated or tailored for specific non-kernel threaded systems? On Mon, 11 Feb 2008, Jeffrey Hutzelman wrote: > --On Monday, February 11, 2008 07:50:10 PM +0100 "Frank Batschulat (Home)" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > if thats the intent, ie. block all signal over the AFS syscall kernel > > execution, the afsd could possibly use sigfillset(3C) & > > thr_sigsetmask(3C), e.g > > (1) That's not "all signals". SIGKILL is a signal. So is SIGSTOP. > (2) It's not afsd's job to set up the operation of the cache manager's > kernel threads. It's afsd's job to fork and make a syscall to donate its > context. This is a perfectly legitimate way to create kernel threads, and > as with a number of cases, the reason AFS does it this way is because we've > been using kernel threads since before most operating systems had them. > > -- Jeffrey T. Hutzelman (N3NHS) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Carnegie Mellon University - Pittsburgh, PA > > _______________________________________________ > OpenAFS-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel > -------------------------------------- Sean O'Malley, Information Technologist Michigan State University ------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
