Well, it shouldn't be. forget_original_parent should update
real_parent for every child on either list, and then zap_thread unlinks
each child from the current parent and links it to the new real_parent.
A couple of printks in there should be able to work out if I'm wrong,
though...
> @@ -554,17 +553,16 @@
> do_notify_parent(current, current->exit_signal);
>
> zap_again:
> - list_for_each_safe(_p, _n, ¤t->children)
> - zap_thread(list_entry(_p,struct task_struct,sibling), current, 0);
> - list_for_each_safe(_p, _n, ¤t->ptrace_children)
> - zap_thread(list_entry(_p,struct task_struct,ptrace_list), current, 1);
> + while (!list_empty(¤t->children))
> + zap_thread(list_entry(current->children.next,struct task_struct,sibling), current, 0);
> + while (!list_empty(¤t->ptrace_children))
> + zap_thread(list_entry(current->ptrace_children.next,struct task_struct,sibling), current, 0);
As Linus points out, typo right there on the last argument.
-- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/