[lkml]   [2004]   [Nov]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: is killing zombies possible w/o a reboot?
    On Wednesday 03 November 2004 09:33, bert hubert wrote:
    >On Wed, Nov 03, 2004 at 07:51:39AM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
    >> But I'd tried to run gnomeradio earlier to listen to the
    >> elections,
    >Depressing enough.
    >> I'd tried to kill the zombie earlier but couldn't.
    >> Isn't there some way to clean up a &^$#^#@)_ zombie?
    >Kill the parent, is the only (portable) way.

    The parent would have been the icon. It opened its usual sized small
    window, but never did anything to it. I clicked on closing the
    window, but 10 seconds later the system asked me if I wanted to kill
    it as it wasn't responding. I said yes, the window disappeared, but
    kpm said gomeradio was still present as process 8162, and that wasn't
    killable. Funny thing is, on the reboot, it automaticly self
    restored and ran just fine.

    I consider this as one of linux's achilles heels. Such a hung and
    dead process can be properly disposed of by a primitive os called os9
    because it keeps track of all resources in tables in the kernel
    memory space. Issueing a kill procnumber removes the process from
    the exec queue, reclaims all its memory to the system free memory
    pool, and removes it from the IRQ service tables if an entry exists
    there. Near instant, total cleanup, nothing left, in about 250
    microseconds max. 1.79 mhz cpu's aren't quite instant :)

    Lets just say that I think having to reboot because of a zombie that
    has resources locked up, and have the reboot fubared by it too,
    aren't exactly friendly actions.

    I fully realise that linux has a much more complex method of
    allocating resources, but doesn't it *know* exactly what resources
    have been passed out to each process?

    And why is there no entry from the kill function into that resource
    management portion of the kernel so that this could also be done by
    the linux kernel, say with a "kill --total procnumber"?

    Seems like a heck of a good question to me since an os written to run
    on a 64k machine in 1981, and expanded to run on a 128K to 2 megabyte
    machine in 1986 can do it just fine. Even if that process is still
    running and spitting out data to its parent window/shell! Or if its
    crashed and scribbled over all its memory, makes no difference to
    os9. You (root) wants it gone, fine, its gone.

    Cheers, Gene
    "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
    soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
    -Ed Howdershelt (Author)
    99.28% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly attorneys please note, additions to this message
    by Gene Heskett are:
    Copyright 2004 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:07    [W:0.024 / U:0.108 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site