Re: [PATCH 0/2] Don't show PF_IO_WORKER in /proc/<pid>/task/
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Date: 2021-03-25 20:45:28
Also in:
lkml
Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)
- 2021-03-25 · Re: [PATCH 0/2] Don't show PF_IO_WORKER in /proc/<pid>/task/ · Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
- 2021-03-25 · Re: [PATCH 0/2] Don't show PF_IO_WORKER in /proc/<pid>/task/ · Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
- 2021-03-25 · Re: [PATCH 0/2] Don't show PF_IO_WORKER in /proc/<pid>/task/ · Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
- 2021-03-25 · Re: [PATCH 0/2] Don't show PF_IO_WORKER in /proc/<pid>/task/ · Eric W. Biederman <hidden>
- 2021-03-25 · Re: [PATCH 0/2] Don't show PF_IO_WORKER in /proc/<pid>/task/ · Eric W. Biederman <hidden>
On 03/25, Linus Torvalds wrote:
The whole "signals are very special for IO threads" thing has caused so many problems, that maybe the solution is simply to _not_ make them special?
Or may be IO threads should not abuse CLONE_THREAD? Why does create_io_thread() abuse CLONE_THREAD ? One reason (I think) is that this implies SIGKILL when the process exits/execs, anything else? Oleg.