lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Oct]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] ptrace: cleanup ptrace_init_task()->ptrace_link() path
On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 01:55:07 +0100 Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:

> On 10/30, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:56:56 +0100
> > Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > > ptrace
> >
> > Speaking of which, I'm still sitting on
> > do_wait-optimization-do-not-place-sub-threads-on-task_struct-children-list.patch.
>
> (this patch has nothing to do with ptrace)
>
> > Should I drop it?
>
> Why? I think this is good optimization and imho cleanup.
>
> There is no point to have sub-thread in ->children list and this
> slows down do_wait() if a child has a lot of threads, it has to
> iterate over all sub-threads just to filter them out.
>

On 17 Sep you said:

: Yes, risky... God knows who can do list_for_each(->children) and expect to
: find the sub-threads. But this is obviously good optimization/simplification.
:
: It is just ugly to place sub-threads on ->children list, this buys nothing
: but slown downs do_wait(). (this was needed, afaics, to handle ptraced but
: not re-parented threads a long ago).

so that's why I didn't merge it into 2.6.32. Is the patch still
considered "risky"?



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-10-31 02:59    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site