[lkml]   [2008]   [Sep]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 2.6.27-rc5] Fix itimer/many thread hang.
    On 09/09, Frank Mayhar wrote:
    > On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 20:01 +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
    > > As for this particular function, it seems to me that ->signal == NULL
    > > is not possible, no?
    > That's not completely clear to me. I'm allowing for the possibility
    > that it might be called during, say, process teardown. It's used in so
    > many places that I'm uncomfortable leaving the == NULL check out.

    Please see my reply to Roland.

    > > Btw, this function has a lot of callers, perhaps it is better to
    > > uninline it.
    > If that's the consensus I'll do so. I assumed that speed was more
    > important than space in this case. Am I mistaken?

    Are you sure inline will be faster? It has a lot of calllers, think
    about i-cache. And the function call is not that expensive.

    But I am not expert.

    > > So, the first CLONE_THREAD creates ->cputime.totals. After that
    > > thread_group_cputime_account_xxx() start to use it even if the task
    > > doesn't have the attached cpu timers.
    > >
    > > Stupid question: can't we allocate .totals in posix_cpu_timer_create() /
    > > set_process_cpu_timer() ?
    > That was the original plan but we (that is, Roland and I) decided to
    > eliminate the separate storage for the dead-threads totals. It's now
    > all kept in the totals field, for the whole thread group.

    I see, thanks.


     \ /
      Last update: 2008-09-10 14:09    [W:0.020 / U:37.496 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site