On Thu, 05 Feb 2004 16:41:29 +0100, Andre Oppermann <andre_at_freebsd.org> wrote: > Jun Su wrote: >> Hi All, >> John Baldwin's proc lock commit today made my patch broken, so I have >> revised the patch, and uploaded it to the same position: >> http://www.arbornet.org/~junsu/pid.diff >> The revised patch has been improved based on the feedback. Basically, >> 1. Added a new sysctl value kern.pidmax to control the current pid >> range. >> This value can influence the reuse pid period. The initial value is >> 4096. > > This sysctl name looks very misleading to me. Unless the highest PID > I can get here is actually 4096. > The sysctl should be named as pidrange or some similiar name to avoid the confusing. I just choose a name same as the vairable name. Jun Su >> 2. Change the meaning of PID_MAX back to what it was, and sainty-check >> whether the pid is 5 digit based on PID_MAX. (I think it is impossible >> that >> pid expand PID_MAX for the algorithm nature, though.) >> 3. The initial pid table size is bumped from 1<<5 to 1<<7. > -- Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/Received on Thu Feb 05 2004 - 17:16:45 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:41 UTC