Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 22 Sep 2002 05:49:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 22 Sep 2002 05:49:48 -0400 Received: from mx1.elte.hu ([157.181.1.137]:4304 "HELO mx1.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Sun, 22 Sep 2002 05:49:47 -0400 Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2002 12:02:10 +0200 (CEST) From: Ingo Molnar Reply-To: Ingo Molnar To: Andrea Arcangeli Cc: Cort Dougan , "Martin J. Bligh" , Rik van Riel , Andries Brouwer , William Lee Irwin III , Subject: Re: [patch] lockless, scalable get_pid(), for_each_process() elimination, 2.5.35-BK In-Reply-To: <20020922003448.GU1345@dualathlon.random> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 849 Lines: 23 On Sun, 22 Sep 2002, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > Nevertheless the current get_pid is very bad when the tasklist grows and > the pid space is reduced, [...] > It may not be the best for a 1million pid case, but certainly it is a > must have for 2.4 and I think it could be ok for 2.5 too. It is been > submitted for 2.5 a number of times, I quote below the 2.4 version just > so you know what I'm talking about exactly [...] Andrea, the new PID allocator (and new pidhash) went into 2.5.37, there's no get_pid() anymore. Do we agree that the runtime-bitmap hack^H^H^H^patch is now moot for 2.5? Ingo - 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/