Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 19 Aug 2002 13:51:42 -0500 | From | Dave McCracken <> | Subject | Re: [patch] O(1) sys_exit(), threading, scalable-exit-2.5.31-A6 |
| |
--On Monday, August 19, 2002 08:36:24 PM +0200 Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
> well, this means that we'd still have to iterate through both lists in > wait4(), and we'd have to maintain the ptrace list(s) in all the relevant > codepaths - does this buy us anything relative to -B4?
The lists would constitute the tasks that wait4() should consider, at least. And maintaining the list wouldn't be any more work than the current reparenting. I do admit that I don't see a significant win, codewise, other than aesthetics.
In looking at the code I was wondering something. What happens to the real parent of a ptraced task when it calls wait4()? If that's its only child, won't it return ECHILD?
Dave McCracken
====================================================================== Dave McCracken IBM Linux Base Kernel Team 1-512-838-3059 dmccr@us.ibm.com T/L 678-3059
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |