On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 11:58:22AM -0400, Rich Felker wrote: > 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. :-)
5.3 is not going to be an LTS and we don't do new features after the merge window is closed anyway. :) Christian
