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

Davide Libenzi
2007-04-06T23:00:00Z

On Fri, 6 Apr 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, 6 Apr 2007, Davide Libenzi wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 6 Apr 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > >
> > > 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.
> >
> > But "signal" has *nothing* to do with what the structure store nowadays,
> > really. It's a pool of "things" that are not Linux task specific.
>
> You're ignoring reality. It has more to do with signals than with
> processes. Look at *all* the fields in the top half of the structure, up
> to (and including) the "tty" field. They're *all* about signal semantics
> in one form or another (whether it's directly about shared signal
> behaviour, or indirectly about *sources* of signals like process control
> or timers).
>
> And renaming it really has no upsides, even *if* you had a point, which
> you don't.

OTOH, the other half of the fields has nothing to do with them (signals).
Not only, the more time it passes, the more ppl (reason why I posted this
comment in the beginning) sees the "struct signal_struct" has a boilerplate
where to store shared resources.
Chosing a name like "struct task_shared_ctx" fits it, because "signals"
are *a* task_shared thing, whereas all the fields on the bottom of the
"struct signal_struct" (on top of the ones that ppl will want to add
everytime there's somethign to be shared between task structs) are *not* a
"signal".

- Davide