This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH v3 0/1] waitid: process group enhancement
- From: Rich Felker <dalias at libc dot org>
- To: Christian Brauner <christian dot brauner at ubuntu dot com>
- Cc: linux-kernel at vger dot kernel dot org, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org, oleg at redhat dot com, alistair23 at gmail dot com, ebiederm at xmission dot com, arnd at arndb dot de, torvalds at linux-foundation dot org, adhemerval dot zanella at linaro dot org, fweimer at redhat dot com, palmer at sifive dot com, macro at wdc dot com, zongbox at gmail dot com, akpm at linux-foundation dot org, viro at zeniv dot linux dot org dot uk, hpa at zytor dot com
- Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 11:58:22 -0400
- Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/1] waitid: process group enhancement
- References: <CAKmqyKMJPQAOKn11xepzAwXOd4e9dU0Cyz=A0T-uMEgUp5yJjA@mail.gmail.com> <20190814154400.6371-1-christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>
On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 05:43:59PM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote:
> Hey everyone,
>
> This patch adds support for waiting on the current process group by
> specifying waitid(P_PGID, 0, ...) as discussed in [1]. The details why
> we need to do this are in the commit message of [PATCH 1/1] so I won't
> repeat them here.
>
> I've picked this up since the thread has gone stale and parts of
> userspace are actually blocked by this.
>
> Note that the patch has been changed to be more closely aligned with the
> P_PIDFD changes to waitid() I have sitting in my for-next branch (cf. [2]).
> This makes the merge conflict a little simpler and picks up on the
> coding style discussions that guided the P_PIDFD patchset.
>
> There was some desire to get this feature in with 5.3 (cf. [3]).
> But given that this is a new feature for waitid() and for the sake of
> avoiding any merge conflicts I would prefer to land this in the 5.4
> merge window together with the P_PIDFD changes.
That makes 5.4 (or later, depending on other stuff) the hard minimum
for RV32 ABI. Is that acceptable? I was under the impression (perhaps
mistaken) that 5.3 was going to be next LTS series which is why I'd
like to have the necessary syscalls for a complete working RV32
userspace in it. If I'm wrong about that please ignore me. :-)
Rich