Re: More syscall messaging commits, and some testing code as well.

[Matthew Dillon <dillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

:....except for sigkill, etc. right? In which case, the userland
:shouldn't get a say in what it does; pending operations in the kernel
:obviously need to complete/return or be stopped or otherwise mopped up
:but the userland process itself is dying and shouldn't be required to
:cooperate with the system to mop up any pending "waiting on return
:messages", I'd have thought.
:
:
:-- 
:jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/
:Tel +44(0)117 9287088 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112 http://ioctl.org/jan/

    Right.  kill -9 is only a pseudo-signal.  It really just causes the
    process to enter into kernel mode and call the kernel exit1() routine.
    That code will obviously have to abort all pending system calls (and
    wait for the ones that cannot be aborted to complete, just like we do
    now).

					-Matt
					Matthew Dillon 
					<dillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>