[PATCH] Rename "swapper" to "idle"

[PATCH] Rename "swapper" to "idle"

[Hua Zhong]

This patch renames the "swapper" process (pid 0) to a more appropriate name "idle". The name "swapper" is not obviously meaningful and confuses a lot of people (e.g., when seen in oops report).

Patch not tested, but I guess it works. :-)

Signed-off-by: Hua Zhong <hzhong@gmail.com>

diff --git a/include/linux/init_task.h b/include/linux/init_task.h
index 41ecbb8..5e3ca4f 100644
--- a/include/linux/init_task.h
+++ b/include/linux/init_task.h
@@ -108,7 +108,7 @@ #define INIT_TASK(tsk)      \
        .cap_permitted  = CAP_FULL_SET,                                 \
        .keep_capabilities = 0,                                         \
        .user           = INIT_USER,                                    \
-       .comm           = "swapper",                                    \
+       .comm           = "idle",                                       \
        .thread         = INIT_THREAD,                                  \
        .fs             = &init_fs,                                     \
        .files          = &init_files,                                  \

Re: [PATCH] Rename "swapper" to "idle"

[Steven Rostedt]

On Thu, 2006-04-20 at 16:15 -0700, Hua Zhong wrote:
> This patch renames the "swapper" process (pid 0) to a more appropriate name "idle". The name "swapper" is not obviously meaningful and confuses a lot of people (e.g., when seen in oops report).
> 
> Patch not tested, but I guess it works. :-)

Usually a patch not tested will never be accepted no matter how trivial
it is, unless you had to modify a driver to match a new syntax or
something and you don't have the device.  Did you at least compile it?

> 
> Signed-off-by: Hua Zhong <hzhong@gmail.com>
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/init_task.h b/include/linux/init_task.h
> index 41ecbb8..5e3ca4f 100644
> --- a/include/linux/init_task.h
> +++ b/include/linux/init_task.h
> @@ -108,7 +108,7 @@ #define INIT_TASK(tsk)      \
>         .cap_permitted  = CAP_FULL_SET,                                 \
>         .keep_capabilities = 0,                                         \
>         .user           = INIT_USER,                                    \
> -       .comm           = "swapper",                                    \
> +       .comm           = "idle",                                       \
>         .thread         = INIT_THREAD,                                  \
>         .fs             = &init_fs,                                     \
>         .files          = &init_files,                                  \
> -

Yes, swapper is because of historical reasons.  In most text books for
Unix, the initial process on boot up is called "swapper".  Probably
because those early Unix systems had this process handle the swapping
(as kswapd does today).

By doing this, it will probably make Linux out of sync with all the text
books on Unix, so it really is Linus' call.

-- Steve

Re: [PATCH] Rename "swapper" to "idle"

[Bernd Eckenfels]

Hua Zhong <hzhong@gmail.com> wrote:
> This patch renames the "swapper" process (pid 0) to a more appropriate name "idle". The name "swapper" is not obviously meaningful and confuses a lot of people (e.g., when seen in oops report).
> Patch not tested, but I guess it works. :-)

on win the system idle process shows up in taskmanager so you can see its
cpu usage and ctx switches scheduled from it. We could avoid the skipping in
/proc, also?

Gruss
Bernd

Re: [PATCH] Rename "swapper" to "idle"

[Joshua Hudson]

On 4/20/06, Bernd Eckenfels <be-news06@lina.inka.de> wrote:
> Hua Zhong <hzhong@gmail.com> wrote:
> > This patch renames the "swapper" process (pid 0) to a more appropriate name "idle". The name "swapper" is not obviously meaningful and confuses a lot of people (e.g., when seen in oops report).
> > Patch not tested, but I guess it works. :-)

As we saw in "Which process is associated with process ID 0 (swapper)",
pid 0 can actually do things, such as resend TCP packets. Methinks idle
isn't the best name either.

>
> on win the system idle process shows up in taskmanager so you can see its
> cpu usage and ctx switches scheduled from it. We could avoid the skipping in
> /proc, also?
>
> Gruss
> Bernd
Please, no!

I already have to explain this mess about Windows. We shouldn't be implementing
Microsoft's flaws. Why waist the a line of screen for top?

RE: [PATCH] Rename "swapper" to "idle"

[Hua Zhong]

> On 4/20/06, Bernd Eckenfels <be-news06@lina.inka.de> wrote:
> > Hua Zhong <hzhong@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > This patch renames the "swapper" process (pid 0) to a 
> more appropriate name "idle". The name "swapper" is not 
> obviously meaningful and confuses a lot of people (e.g., when 
> seen in oops report).
> > > Patch not tested, but I guess it works. :-)
> 
> As we saw in "Which process is associated with process ID 0 
> (swapper)", pid 0 can actually do things, such as resend TCP 
> packets. Methinks idle isn't the best name either.

Swapper does not do these things. It just happens to be "running" at that time (and it is always running if the system is idle).

IOW, it is indeed an "idle" process. In fact, all it does is cpu_idle().

> > on win the system idle process shows up in taskmanager so 
> you can see 
> > its cpu usage and ctx switches scheduled from it. We could 
> avoid the 
> > skipping in /proc, also?
> >
> > Gruss
> > Bernd
> Please, no!
> 
> I already have to explain this mess about Windows. We 
> shouldn't be implementing Microsoft's flaws. Why waist the a 
> line of screen for top?
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe 
> linux-kernel" in the body of a message to 
> majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at  
> http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH] Rename "swapper" to "idle"

[Mikado]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hua Zhong wrote:
> Swapper does not do these things. It just happens to be "running" at that time (and it is always running if the system is idle).
> 
> IOW, it is indeed an "idle" process. In fact, all it does is cpu_idle().

Really? Are your sure that swapper only does cpu_idle()???
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFESO7nNWc9T2Wr2JcRAkRlAJwIJumKnS0tj1BvhYZPfoChR7fSAwCdEcC9
TFKn1OA9Wv448TqFU1bxk5k=
=eGf2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [PATCH] Rename "swapper" to "idle"

[Michael Buesch]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 416 bytes --]

On Friday 21 April 2006 16:40, Mikado wrote:
> Hua Zhong wrote:
> > Swapper does not do these things. It just happens to be "running" at that time (and it is always running if the system is idle).
> >
> > IOW, it is indeed an "idle" process. In fact, all it does is cpu_idle().
> 
> Really? Are your sure that swapper only does cpu_idle()???

Yes.
Idle is by definition Nothing.

-- 
Greetings Michael.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] Rename "swapper" to "idle"

[Jan Engelhardt]

>> > Swapper does not do these things. It just happens to be "running" at that time (and it is always running if the system is idle).
>> >
>> > IOW, it is indeed an "idle" process. In fact, all it does is cpu_idle().
>> 
>> Really? Are your sure that swapper only does cpu_idle()???
>
>Yes.
>Idle is by definition Nothing.
>

So call it "voidd" :>


Jan Engelhardt
-- 

Re: [PATCH] Rename "swapper" to "idle"

[Steven Rostedt]

On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 17:08 +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> >> > Swapper does not do these things. It just happens to be "running" at that time (and it is always running if the system is idle).
> >> >
> >> > IOW, it is indeed an "idle" process. In fact, all it does is cpu_idle().
> >> 
> >> Really? Are your sure that swapper only does cpu_idle()???
> >
> >Yes.
> >Idle is by definition Nothing.
> >

> So call it "voidd" :>

That should be "kvoidd" :P

-- Steve