Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Fri, 1 Sep 2000 15:23:42 -0700 (PDT) | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Subject | Re: thread group comments |
| |
On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, Alan Cox wrote: > > > > No, it would be another "clone" option. > > You dont want it in kernel space.
Oh, I basically agree, _except_ that Al Viro has these ideas pending for 2.5.x that basically create a "process capability cache" that is a cache of all the process ID's and capabilities (ie uid, gid, groups etc). Which would be this copy-on-write thing.
And that may end up mixing well with a "CLONE_CAPABILITIES" flag.
Which is not to say that this will necessarily get done. But other changes may make it an option. I was just saying that if done that way, it would be a CLONE_xxxx flag instead of "we will use the thread leaders ID" thing.
> Its also very rare and not a performance case to push into glibc
Yes. For 2.4.x, I'd love to fix anything that can be used to show real performance bugs. Something like "setuid() is slow when I run it threaded is not a real issue". Something like "pthreads is faster under NT than under Linux" _would_ be a real issue.
Linus
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |