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

Evgeniy Polyakov
2005-03-22T04:37:15Z

[-- 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 --]