Hello, On 07/30/2010 04:19 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > But I must admit, I personally dislike this idea. A kernel thread which > is the child of the user-space process, and in fact it is not the "real" > kernel thread. I think this is against the common case. If you do not > care the signals/reparenting, why can't you fork the user-space process > which does all the work via ioctl's ? OK, I do not understand the problem > domain, probably this can't work. Having kernel threads which are children of user process is plain scary considering the many things parent/children relationship implies and various bugs and security vulnerabilities in the area. I can't pinpoint any problem but I think we really shouldn't be adding something like this for this specific use case. If we can get away with exporting a few symbols, let's go that way. Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html