On 01/31, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > Right now, pidfd_send_signal() sends signals to processes, like so: > > * The syscall currently only signals via PIDTYPE_PID which covers > * kill(<positive-pid>, <signal>. It does not signal threads or process > * groups. > > This patch adds PIDFD_THREAD which, potentially confusingly, doesn't > change this (AFAICS). Yes, > So at least that should be documented loudly > and clearly, IMO. Please note /* TODO: respect PIDFD_THREAD */ this patch adds into pidfd_send_signal(). See also this part of discussion > > + /* TODO: respect PIDFD_THREAD */ > > So I've been thinking about this at the end of last week. Do we need to > give userspace a way to send a thread-group wide signal even when a > PIDFD_THREAD pidfd is passed? Or should we just not worry about this > right now and wait until someone needs this? I don't know. I am fine either way, but I think this needs a separate patch and another discussion in any case. Anyway should be trivial, pidfd_send_signal() has the "flags" argument. with Christian in https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240130112126.GA26108@xxxxxxxxxx/ Or did I misunderstand you? Oleg.
