[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20111111164800.GA27245@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 17:48:00 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...nvz.org>,
Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>,
Nathan Lynch <ntl@...ox.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Serge Hallyn <serue@...ibm.com>,
Daniel Lezcano <dlezcano@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] pids: Make it possible to clone tasks with given
pids
On 11/11, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
>
> First of all - let's imagine that we just want to clone a set of tasks. Then
> each of them will have to fork its kids, then report first of them that he's
> OK to fork and wait for it to report back, that forking is done. Then do the
> same for the rest of them. This is not impossible, but painful.
Why we should wait/report? They can do this in parallel, only
"set_last_pid + fork" needs the synchronization or "check + retry".
> Next - let's consider we have some tasks sharing various resources, e.g. mm-s
> or fd-tables. This means, that these tasks should be cloned in the carefully
> calculated sequence with CLONE_XXX flags set. In this case the described above
> scheme with fork() serialization simply won't work and we'll have to invent
> some fancy messaging with "now X fork with Y pid" and "X done with forking,
> please go on" messages.
Can't understand...
Oleg.
--
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