Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1999 14:51:47 -0600 From: Warner Losh <imp@harmony.village.org> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> Cc: "Brian F. Feldman" <green@unixhelp.org>, Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com>, Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>, Peter Wemm <peter@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern init_main.c kern_fork.c kern_linker.c vfs_aio.c src/sys/sys proc.h Message-ID: <199906302051.OAA32535@harmony.village.org> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 30 Jun 1999 20:04:33 %2B0200." <43774.930765873@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <43774.930765873@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <43774.930765873@critter.freebsd.dk> Poul-Henning Kamp writes: : So if we have decided to make struct proc a stable storage kind of : thing, then holding pointers is perfectly ok (with the addition of : a serial number, p_pid wont do). It is the move to stable storage : that has me concerned. Wouldn't a reference count work? That way you could mark the process as dead and when something wakes up that is holding a reference to the pid, it could check to see if the process was alive. If not, it could release its reference. The pid wouldn't be reused until the reference count reached zero... Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199906302051.OAA32535>