On 05/08/2012 04:45 PM, Tom Horsley wrote:
On Tue, 08 May 2012 18:58:18 -0430
Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
This is not to say that it couldn't be any other
way, but actually changing it would mean quite a radical redesign.
I don't know. The suggestion earlier in this thread to
allow kill -9 to make the process go away while leaving
some tiny stub to cleanup after it when the wait
finally does finish seemed perfectly reasonable to
me, and not all that radical. After all, the kill -9
is going to get queued up anyway and take the process
out as soon as it does stop waiting, so whatever
the application is doing is already doomed why make
the whole process and all of its resources hang around?
As several others have stated before me, this is a part of the kernel
implementation. Linux is not unique here. SVR4, BSD, Mach, VAX/VMS,
RT-11, RSTS/e and a bunch of others have the same sort of issue. To
kill processes in a "D" state is a non-trivial task. It would have been
implemented long before this if it were easy.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigital ricks@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx -
- AIM/Skype: therps2 ICQ: 22643734 Yahoo: origrps2 -
- -
- "Do you suffer from long-term memory loss?" "I don't remember" -
- -- Chumbawumba, "Amnesia" (TubThumping) -
----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
users mailing list
users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
