[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m13b38z331.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 09:00:50 -0600
From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, 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.
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru> writes:
> No! That is why I suggest (a long ago, in fact) to move ->children into
> ->signal_struct. When sub-thread forks, we set ->parent = group_leader.
> We don't need forget_original_parent() until the last thead exists. This
> also simplify do_wait().
>
> However, this breaks the current ->pdeath_signal behaviour. In fact (and
> Eric thinks the same) this _fixes_ this behaviour, but may break things.
Thinking about this. As contingency planning if there is something in user
space that actually somehow cares about pdeath_signal, from a threaded
parent we can add a pdeath_signal list, to the task_struct and get
rid of the rest of the complexity.
I think I want to wait until someone screams first.
This does very much mean that we can remove the complexity of
a per thread ->children without fear, of having to revert everything.
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