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    [W:0.059 / U:92.028 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site