From: Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@us.ibm.com>,
Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] coredump: speedup SIGKILL sending
Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2006 16:07:45 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1144354065.2866.116.camel@mindpipe> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060406235519.GA331@oleg>
On Fri, 2006-04-07 at 03:55 +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 04/06, Lee Revell wrote:
> > On Fri, 2006-04-07 at 02:06 +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > With this patch a thread group is killed atomically under ->siglock.
> > > This is faster because we can use sigaddset() instead of force_sig_info()
> > > and this is used in further patches.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
> >
> > Won't this cause huge latencies when a process with lots of threads is
> > killed?
>
> Yes, irqs are disabled. But this is not worse than 'kill -9 pid', note
> that __group_complete_signal() or zap_other_threads() do the same.
Those have been problematic in the past. I am just wondering if this
will be a latency regression, or if changes elsewhere in your patch
negate the effect.
I'm just concerned because it was a lot of work over ~2 years to get 2.6
to perform decently in this area, and we have regressed since 2.6.14 (VM
issue).
Lee
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-04-06 21:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-04-06 22:06 [PATCH 2/4] coredump: speedup SIGKILL sending Oleg Nesterov
2006-04-06 19:45 ` Lee Revell
2006-04-06 23:55 ` Oleg Nesterov
2006-04-06 20:07 ` Lee Revell [this message]
2006-04-07 23:28 ` Oleg Nesterov
2006-04-07 19:42 ` Lee Revell
2006-04-10 4:11 ` Roland McGrath
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=1144354065.2866.116.camel@mindpipe \
--to=rlrevell@joe-job.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
--cc=paulmck@us.ibm.com \
--cc=roland@redhat.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox