On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 21:11 +0000, Alan Cox wrote: > On Maw, 2006-01-24 at 12:26 -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > There is at least NFS lockd that appreciates having a single integer > > per process unique identifier. So there is a practical basis for > > wanting such a thing. > > Which gets us back to refcounting. > > > At least for this first round I think talking about a kpid > > as a container, pid pair makes a lot of sense for the moment, as > > the other implementations just confuse things. > > As an abstract object a kpid to me means a single identifier which > uniquely identifies the process and which in its component parts be they > pointers or not uniquely identifies the process in the container and the > container in the system, both correctly refcounted against re-use. they why not just straight use the task struct pointer for this? It's guaranteed unique.. ;) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: RFC [patch 13/34] PID Virtualization Define new task_pid api
- From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)
- Re: RFC [patch 13/34] PID Virtualization Define new task_pid api
- References:
- RFC [patch 00/34] PID Virtualization Overview
- From: Serge Hallyn <[email protected]>
- RFC [patch 13/34] PID Virtualization Define new task_pid api
- From: Serge Hallyn <[email protected]>
- Re: RFC [patch 13/34] PID Virtualization Define new task_pid api
- From: Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]>
- Re: RFC [patch 13/34] PID Virtualization Define new task_pid api
- From: "Serge E. Hallyn" <[email protected]>
- Re: RFC [patch 13/34] PID Virtualization Define new task_pid api
- From: Alan Cox <[email protected]>
- Re: RFC [patch 13/34] PID Virtualization Define new task_pid api
- From: Dave Hansen <[email protected]>
- Re: RFC [patch 13/34] PID Virtualization Define new task_pid api
- From: Greg KH <[email protected]>
- Re: RFC [patch 13/34] PID Virtualization Define new task_pid api
- From: Dave Hansen <[email protected]>
- Re: RFC [patch 13/34] PID Virtualization Define new task_pid api
- From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)
- Re: RFC [patch 13/34] PID Virtualization Define new task_pid api
- From: Hubertus Franke <[email protected]>
- Re: RFC [patch 13/34] PID Virtualization Define new task_pid api
- From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)
- Re: RFC [patch 13/34] PID Virtualization Define new task_pid api
- From: Hubertus Franke <[email protected]>
- Re: RFC [patch 13/34] PID Virtualization Define new task_pid api
- From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)
- Re: RFC [patch 13/34] PID Virtualization Define new task_pid api
- From: Alan Cox <[email protected]>
- Re: RFC [patch 13/34] PID Virtualization Define new task_pid api
- From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)
- Re: RFC [patch 13/34] PID Virtualization Define new task_pid api
- From: Alan Cox <[email protected]>
- Re: RFC [patch 13/34] PID Virtualization Define new task_pid api
- From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)
- Re: RFC [patch 13/34] PID Virtualization Define new task_pid api
- From: Alan Cox <[email protected]>
- RFC [patch 00/34] PID Virtualization Overview
- Prev by Date: Re: kernel freeze on 2.4.32, apparently in cached_lookup
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH RT] kstopmachine has legit preempt_enable_no_resched (was: 2.6.15-rt12 bugs)
- Previous by thread: Re: RFC [patch 13/34] PID Virtualization Define new task_pid api
- Next by thread: Re: RFC [patch 13/34] PID Virtualization Define new task_pid api
- Index(es):