Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 15:31:57 +1000 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: David Schultz <das@freebsd.org> Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [Bikeshed] sigacts locking Message-ID: <20030511152818.Q74382@gamplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <20030510172609.GA29039@HAL9000.homeunix.com> References: <XFMail.20030509175046.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <20030510172609.GA29039@HAL9000.homeunix.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 10 May 2003, David Schultz wrote: > On Fri, May 09, 2003, John Baldwin wrote: > > As part of the locking for the proc structure, I needed to lock > > the procsig and sigacts stuctures so that kill(), killpg(), > > sigaction() and a few other system calls can be pulled out from > > under Giant. After talking with Peter some, I decided to > > pull the sigacts structure out of the u-area and merge it with > > the procsig structure under the sigacts name. I then added a > > ... > > It occurs to me that this leaves very little in the uarea. You > have a struct pstats, which is less than 256 bytes, and you have > the kinfo_proc, which shouldn't need to be there anyway. Perhaps > now would also be a good time to get rid of uarea swapping and the > associated complexity altogether. I think this was planned. See an old thread about not swapping either the uarea or the stack. It was agreed (?) that the uarea could go but not swapping of the stack. Bruce
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030511152818.Q74382>