Re: init's children list is long and slows reaping children.

Kyle Moffett
2007-04-09T19:30:07Z

On Apr 09, 2007, at 14:09:51, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> * Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 6 Apr 2007, Davide Libenzi wrote:
>>>>> or lets just face it and name it what it is: process_struct ;-)
>>>> That'd be fine too! Wonder if Linus would swallow a rename patch
>>>> like that...
>>> I don't really see the point. It's not even *true*. A "process"
>>> includes more than the shared signal-handling - it would include
>>> files and fs etc too.
>>>
>>> So it's actually *more* correct to call it the shared signal
>>> state than it would be to call it "process" state.
>> we could call it "structure for everything that we know to be ugly
>> about POSIX process semantics" ;-) The rest, like files and fs
>> we've abstracted out already.
> So are you voting for ugly_struct? ;-)
>
> I do think this is still waiting for a more descriptive name, like
> proc_misc_struct or some such. Kernel code should be treated as
> literature, intended to be both read and readable.

Maybe "struct posix_process" is more descriptive? "struct
process_posix"? "Ugly POSIX process semantics data" seems simple
enough to stick in a struct name. "struct uglyposix_process"?

Cheers,
Kyle Moffett