On Wed, 30 Jan 2002, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> On January 30, 2002 10:07 am, Horst von Brand wrote:
> > But most of this will be lost on exec(2).
> > Also, it is my impression that
> > the tree of _running_ processes isn't usually very deep (Say init --> X -->
> > [Random processes] --> [compilations &c], this would make 5 or 6 deep, no
> > more.
> Here's my tree - on a non-very-busy laptop. Why is my X tree so much deeper?
> I suppose if I was running java this would look considerably more interesting.
> |-bash---bash---xinit-+-XFree86
> | `-xfwm-+-xfce---gnome-terminal-+-bash---pstree
It doesn't matter how deep the tree is, on exec() all
previously shared page tables will be blown away.
In this part of the tree, I see exactly 2 processes
which could be sharing page tables (the two bash
processes).
regards,
Rik
--
"Linux holds advantages over the single-vendor commercial OS"
-- Microsoft's "Competing with Linux" document
http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jan 31 2002 - 21:01:18 EST