Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 13 Aug 2002 14:10:56 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 13 Aug 2002 14:10:56 -0400 Received: from mx2.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:20186 "HELO mx2.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Tue, 13 Aug 2002 14:10:55 -0400 Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 20:14:53 +0200 (CEST) From: Ingo Molnar Reply-To: Ingo Molnar To: Linus Torvalds Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch] exit_free(), 2.5.31-A0 In-Reply-To: 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: 1107 Lines: 24 I was actually surprised to see how much effort it takes on the glibc side to solve this (admittedly conceptually hard) problem without any kernel help - it's ugly and slow, and still not completely tight. By providing this 'exit and free stack' capability we can help tremendously. the thing that makes it special and hard is the completely shared VM. There's just no way for a thread to 'get rid of itself' atomically and also exit in the same round, without extensive locking and signal passing. Linux actually has a very very fast clone()+exit() codepath, lets make it possible for usespace to use it. in essence the 'exit and send notification signal' thing now became a simple word written into userspace. Should this be a more formal thing - userspace mailboxes for the kernel to put events into? I think that might be a bit overboard though. 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/