Re: [PATCH] exec: fix posix-timers leak and pending signal loss

[Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>]

Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>  Frankly, I think the old code is much more prone to unforeseen problems
>  than the new.  

It's a question of testing coverage, and historical fragility of that part
of the code.  I'm uncomfortable making changes in there unless we're early
in the release cycle.

>  > Had you not rolled three distinct patches into one (hint) I'd have
>  > forwarded along the leak fix and sat on the rest for post-2.6.9.
> 
>  I don't like being an enabler of bad code.  So I didn't do a separate fix
>  inside something that I already knew needed to be ripped out.  If you want
>  an untested minimal fix for just the leak potential, leaving the semantics
>  frotzed in multiple ways

As long as "frotzed" != "goes oops mysteriously two days after we release
2.6.9" I'm happy.

> you can try the following.

I shall, thanks.