lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Aug]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    Date
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] CRED: Fix __task_cred()'s lockdep check and banner comment
    On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 1:13 PM, Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com> wrote:
    >
    > I think it is totally reasonable to add a per pid lock,
    > that would protect the pid->task[...] hlist.  That would make
    > things clearer and finer grained without a lot of effort.  Just
    > a little more struct pid bloat, and a little extra care in fork,
    > when we add to those lists.

    Hmm. Have you taken a look at Nick Piggin's VFS scalability patches?
    They introduce this "RCU-safe hash chain lock", where each hashchain
    has a lock-bit in the low bit. I wonder if that would be the right
    thing to use?

    > Even with the per-pgrp lock we still need a lock on the global process
    > list for the kill -KILL -1 case.  Which suggests that tasklist_lock is
    > still needed for part of kill_something_info.

    Well, that -1 case is special anyway. The fact that we might want to
    use the tasklist_lock there is not very relevant, I think. That is
    _not_ a hotpath, really (at least not under any relevant loads, I'm
    sure you could make a silly benchmark of "kill(-1,0)").

    Linus
    --
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2010-08-05 22:29    [W:3.262 / U:0.004 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site