Re: [RFC, PATCH 1/3] introduce SYS_CLONE_MASK

[Eric W. Biederman]

"Albert Cahalan" <acahalan@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> This has long been rotten. Mind fixing it for us? :-)
>
> We have N types of thread on M CPUs. Pick something, N or M,
> to be at the top level in /proc. The other goes below, in the
> per-process task directories.
>
> You then have either N or M things showing up in ps, not N*M.
>
> Note that both ps and top can print the CPU number just fine.
> Abusing the task name for this is just retarded. This suggests
> that the top level should be the type of task, with the lower
> level in /proc/*/task being per-CPU and not needing distinct
> naming at all.

In a lot of ways that is reasonable.  However kernel threads don't
share signal handling and getting to the point where they could share
signal handling would be difficult so we cannot use the generic
CLONE_THREAD handling they really are more like individual processes.
So at that level the cpu number in the name is just to help tell them
apart. 

Eric

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/