Re: /proc/sys/kernel/pid_max issues
From: William Lee Irwin III (wli_at_holomorphy.com)
Date: 09/12/04
- Previous message: William Lee Irwin III: "Re: /proc/sys/kernel/pid_max issues"
- In reply to: William Lee Irwin III: "Re: /proc/sys/kernel/pid_max issues"
- Next in thread: Ingo Molnar: "Re: /proc/sys/kernel/pid_max issues"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 03:10:49 -0700 To: Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
On Sun, Sep 12, 2004 at 02:36:05AM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>> + if (map > &pidmap_array[pid_max/BITS_PER_PAGE])
>> + map = pidmap_array;
>> if (unlikely(!map->page)) {
>> unsigned long page = get_zeroed_page(GFP_KERNEL);
On Sun, Sep 12, 2004 at 02:58:05AM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> If pid_max == BITS_PER_PAGE*n, none of &pidmap_array[pid_max/BITS_PER_PAGE]
> is usable, so if we must complete a full revolution around pidmap_array[]
> to discover a free pid slightly less than last_pid we will miss it. Hence:
That could only happen if max_steps were initialized to PIDMAP_ENTRIES
instead of PIDMAP_ENTRIES + 1, so this more accurate upper bound is not
strictly necessary, though with this in place, we could probably reduce
max_steps to just PIDMAP_ENTRIES so we cycle no further than the block
we began; I'll not bother with that.
-- wli
-
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/
- Previous message: William Lee Irwin III: "Re: /proc/sys/kernel/pid_max issues"
- In reply to: William Lee Irwin III: "Re: /proc/sys/kernel/pid_max issues"
- Next in thread: Ingo Molnar: "Re: /proc/sys/kernel/pid_max issues"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
