Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 5 Feb 2024 16:22:41 +0100 | From | Oleg Nesterov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] pidfd: implement PIDFD_THREAD flag for pidfd_open() |
| |
On 02/02, Christian Brauner wrote: > > > @@ -2050,6 +2051,8 @@ static void pidfd_show_fdinfo(struct seq_file *m, struct file *f) > > > > seq_put_decimal_ll(m, "Pid:\t", nr); > > > > + /* TODO: report PIDFD_THREAD */ > > So I think we don't need to do anything here. Since PIDFD_THREAD sets > O_EXCL in file->f_flags and in contrast to do_dentry_open() it isn't > dropped. So userspace can already detect PIDFD_NONBLOCK as O_NONBLOCK > and PIDFD_THREAD as O_EXCL.
Ah, indeed, I didn't know that fs/proc/fd.c:seq_show() reports ->f_flags. Thanks.
OK, what about another TODO in sys_pidfd_send_signal() ?
I mean, should I send a simple patch which changes pidfd_send_signal() to use do_send_specific() if PIDFD_THREAD ? Or do you think this should be controlled by pidfd_send_signal's "flags" argument?
I honestly do not know what makes more sense.
Oleg.
| |