lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2007 12:30:18 -0600 From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>, Robin Holt <holt@....com>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Chris Snook <csnook@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jack Steiner <steiner@...ricas.sgi.com> Subject: Re: init's children list is long and slows reaping children. Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> writes: > no. Two _completely separate_ lists. > > i.e. a to-be-reaped task will still be on the main list _too_. The main > list is for all the PID semantics rules. The reap-list is just for > wait4() processing. The two would be completely separate. And what pray tell except for heuristics is the list of children used for? I could find a use in the scheduler (oldest_child and younger/older_sibling). I could find a use in mm/oom_kill. I could find a use in irixsig where it roles it's own version of wait4. Perhaps I was blind but that was about it. I didn't see the child list implementing any semantics we really care about to user space. Eric - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists