Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/4] coredump: speedup SIGKILL sending | From | Lee Revell <> | Date | Thu, 06 Apr 2006 16:07:45 -0400 |
| |
On Fri, 2006-04-07 at 03:55 +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > On 04/06, Lee Revell wrote: > > On Fri, 2006-04-07 at 02:06 +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > With this patch a thread group is killed atomically under ->siglock. > > > This is faster because we can use sigaddset() instead of force_sig_info() > > > and this is used in further patches. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru> > > > > Won't this cause huge latencies when a process with lots of threads is > > killed? > > Yes, irqs are disabled. But this is not worse than 'kill -9 pid', note > that __group_complete_signal() or zap_other_threads() do the same.
Those have been problematic in the past. I am just wondering if this will be a latency regression, or if changes elsewhere in your patch negate the effect.
I'm just concerned because it was a lot of work over ~2 years to get 2.6 to perform decently in this area, and we have regressed since 2.6.14 (VM issue).
Lee
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |