On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 02:12:50PM +0100, Dag-Erling Sm??rgrav wrote: > "Igor Mozolevsky" <igor_at_hybrid-lab.co.uk> writes: > > This makes memory management in the userland hideously and > > unnecessarily complicated. It's simpler to have SIGDANGER [...] > > You don't seem to understand what Poul-Henning was trying to point out, > which is that broadcasting SIGDANGER can make a bad situation much, much > worse by waking up and paging in every single process in the system, > including processes that are blocked and wouldn't otherwise run for > several minutes, hours or even days (getty, inetd, sshd, mountd, even > nfsd / nfsiod in some cases can sleep for days at a time waiting for > I/O) By making the default action for SIGDANGER to be SIG_IGN, this problem would be mostly solved. Only processes that actually care about SIGDANGER and installing the handler for it would require some non-trivial and resource-hungry operation.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:24 UTC