On Sat, Feb 23, 2002 at 12:29:47AM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> Wouldn't it be a much cleaner patch to limit the maximum number of
> processes to less than the number of pids available. You seem to be
> fixing a non problem by adding branches to the innards of a loop.
I've seen this one before. It seems to kick in at 11K processes, where
one would normally expect it much higher... so I'm not sure a constant
upper bound on that counter suffices. Maybe clashes of pid's with pgrp's
and sessions and tgrps are what does that, maybe it's something else.
and of course:
#include <stdgeek.h> /* Any hope of a non-O(tasks) solution? */
Cheers,
Bill
-
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/