Re: [RFC, PATCH 1/3] introduce SYS_CLONE_MASK

[Robin Holt]

OK.  I just got the OK from management.  The system we were booting was
for research only.  We had NR_CPUS=num_online_cpus()=4096 which were
non-hyperthreaded.  With no attached I/O and the tweak I originally
posted plus one change Jack has already gotten accepted, the machine
booted in approx 12 minutes.

Thanks,
Robin


On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 10:20:27AM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Roland McGrath <roland@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
> > I concur with Eric's assessment.  Adding new magic bits to the generic
> > clone path seems like a poor way to cope with kernel threads.  I think
> > it's better if kernel thread setup gets less like normal user process
> > setup.  I also agree with Eric that PPID of 0 is a very natural way for
> > kernel threads to be displayed.  We need to know more about the nature
> > of the compatibility issue in procps to judge whether there is good
> > reason to avoid changing it.
> 
> I just investigated the procps issue.  Using init_task as the parent
> nothing sticks out as being wrong in /proc.
> 
> Further when I modified pstree to accept 0 as it's starting pid (from
> which all else would be rooted).  All of the kernel threads showed up.
> 
> So if anything I it is a feature that kernel threads don't show up
> by default in pstree (when PPID == 0).  It isn't a subtle kernel bug.
> 
> Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/