Re: [PATCH 3/3] pids: Make it possible to clone tasks with givenpids

[Oleg Nesterov]

On 11/11, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
>
> > Yes, sysctl+clone should be "atomic", but that is all. Does it really
> > hurt? OK, if nothing else, can't you do somthing like
> ...
> Nope, as I said to Tejun, we will most likely not forks children in the depth-first
> order,

But this doesn't matter. I think you misunderstood a bit. You can do
set_last_pid+clone at any time. It doesn't depen on previous clone's.
Unless, of course, the necessary pid_nr was already used, but this is
equally true for CLONE_CHILD_USEPIDS.

> But I don't insist.

You should ;)

> If the CLONE_CHILD_USEPIDS has absolutely no way in the kernel we'll
> have to go the uglier path.

All I think is: we should discuss everything we can before we add the
new API. Probably we need a wider CC.

Yes, personally I can't say I like CLONE_CHILD_USEPIDS very much. But
I agree that sysctl(set_last_pid) (or whatever) is not perfect too.
To me, it has only one but very important (imho) advantage: it is much
simpler and understandable.

Oleg.

--
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/