Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 20 Jan 2006 12:23:44 -0700
From:      Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org>
To:        Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
Cc:        Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org>, current@freebsd.org, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
Subject:   Re: kernel thread as real threads..
Message-ID:  <43D138C0.9040801@samsco.org>
In-Reply-To: <43D13711.9000509@elischer.org>
References:  <43D05151.5070409@elischer.org>	<20060120030105.GA5286@xor.obsecurity.org>	<43D0715A.7020302@elischer.org>	<20060120061955.GA8687@xor.obsecurity.org>	<20060120085226.GQ83922@FreeBSD.org> <43D0AB26.5070407@samsco.org> <20060120095214.GA11088@xor.obsecurity.org> <43D13711.9000509@elischer.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Julian Elischer wrote:

> Kris Kennaway wrote:
> 
>>
>> Correct me if I'm wrong, but the stats aren't accounted to the parent
>> process either.  I'm pretty sure I've seen situations where a thread
>> was using a lot of CPU, but if you believe top(1) then every process
>> in the system is idle (except for the fact that the system is 0%
>> idle).  In this situation there's no way to tell which threaded
>> process is using resources.
>>  
>>
> 
> you may be right.. I plan to examine stats over the next week as part of 
> the kernel threads work.
> I may be able to improve the situation.
> 

Um, would this be considered a security flaw, since process time limits
likely aren't being enforced?

> my aim is that for threads that are doing M:N work the stats will 
> accumulate on the thread
> for a short while and then be collected to the KSEG when ther eis reason 
> to think that
> the kernel thread has changed purpose or exits (both of which happen a 
> lot in KSE).
> 
> for 1:1 threads, they will continue to accumulate on the thread, since 
> no "KSE events" will
> occur.
> 
> The KSEGRPs stats will be collected to the process when asked for.
> I will probably also change the way that 'ps' shows these (and threads). 
> I'm not sure what to do about top yet. we really need to be able to show a
> process name AND a thread name when the threads are shown and have names.
> 
>> Kris
>>

Does pthreads allow the programmer to name threads in a user and/or
kernel visible way?  Is this something that is really all that
important?

Scott




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?43D138C0.9040801>