[lkml]   [2005]   [Nov]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC] [PATCH 00/13] Introduce task_pid api

> >>@@ -2925,7 +2925,7 @@ void submit_bio(int rw, struct bio *bio)
> >> if (unlikely(block_dump)) {
> >> char b[BDEVNAME_SIZE];
> >> printk(KERN_DEBUG "%s(%d): %s block %Lu on %s\n",
> >>- current->comm, current->pid,
> >>+ current->comm, task_pid(current),
> >> (rw & WRITE) ? "WRITE" : "READ",
> >> (unsigned long long)bio->bi_sector,
> >> bdevname(bio->bi_bdev,b));
> >
> >...and now printk is close to useless, because uer can't know to
> >which pidspace that pid belongs. Oops.
> Uhh, this patch doesn't introduce any kind of virtualization yet.
> When that happens, _this_ code will remain the same (it wants the
> real pid), but *other* code will switch to use task_vpid(current)
> instead. This is an extremely literal translation of current->pid to
> task_pid(current), both of which do exactly the same thing.

Hmm... it is hard to judge a patch without context. Anyway, can't we
get process snasphot/resume without virtualizing pids? Could we switch
to 128-bits so that pids are never reused or something like that?

Thanks, Sharp!
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-11-16 21:38    [W:0.101 / U:3.752 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site