From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] signal: Allow RT tasks to cache one sigqueue struct
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2021 21:58:17 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87lfb263h2.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m11rcu7nbr.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org>
On Thu, Mar 04 2021 at 13:04, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> writes:
>>
>> We could of course do the caching unconditionally for all tasks.
>
> Is there any advantage to only doing this for realtime tasks?
It was mostly to avoid tons of cached entries hanging around all over
the place. So I limited it to the case which the RT users deeply cared
about. Also related to the accounting question below.
> If not it probably makes sense to do the caching for all tasks.
>
> I am wondering if we want to count the cached sigqueue structure to the
> users rt signal rlimit?
That makes some sense, but that's a user visible change as a single
signal will up the count for a tasks lifetime while today it is removed
from accounting again once the signal is delivered. So that needs some
thought.
Thanks,
tglx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-04 20:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-03 14:20 [PATCH] signal: Allow RT tasks to cache one sigqueue struct Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2021-03-03 15:37 ` Oleg Nesterov
2021-03-04 21:10 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-03-05 10:57 ` Oleg Nesterov
2021-03-04 21:14 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-03-03 22:09 ` Eric W. Biederman
2021-03-04 8:11 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2021-03-04 15:02 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-03-04 19:04 ` Eric W. Biederman
2021-03-04 20:58 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2021-03-10 18:54 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-03-10 21:57 ` Eric W. Biederman
2021-03-10 23:56 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-03-11 12:45 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-03-11 14:20 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-03-11 16:32 ` Eric W. Biederman
2021-03-04 19:01 ` Eric W. Biederman
[not found] <draft-874khk5yed.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
2021-03-10 8:57 ` Thomas Gleixner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87lfb263h2.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=bristot@redhat.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matt@codeblueprint.co.uk \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.