Re: [patch 1/2] fork_connector: add a fork connector

[Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1341 bytes --]

On Mon, 2005-03-21 at 12:52 -0800, Ram wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-03-21 at 04:48, Guillaume Thouvenin wrote:
> > ChangeLog:
> > 
> >   - Remove the global cn_fork_lock and replace it by a per CPU 
> >     counter. 
> >   - The processor ID has been added in the data part of the message.
> >     Thus datas sent in a message are: "CPU_ID PARENT_PID CHILD_PID"
> > 
> >   Those modifications were done to be more scalable because, as
> > mentioned by Jesse Barnes, the global cn_fork_lock won't work well on a
> > large CPU system.
> > 
> >   This patch applies to 2.6.11-mm4.
> Guillaume,
> 
>      If a bunch of applications are listening for fork events, 
>      your patch allows any application to turn off the 
>      fork event notification?  Is this the right behavior?
> 
>      Should'nt it turn off the fork-event notification when 
>      the number of listeners become zero?

There is no number of listeners - netlink sockets provide multicast
dataflow.
[Although one can obtain that number].

As far as I can see, Guillaume's application is main management utility
- 
it can turn on or off some feature, like "ip" can turn on or off
interfaces 
without waiting when bounded processes decide to exit.

> RP

-- 
        Evgeniy Polyakov

Crash is better than data corruption -- Arthur Grabowski

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]