On Wed, 3 Dec 2008, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > The way patch 2 uses pids is just stupid. It has nothing to do with > pids aren't unique. You do a full walk of the process list instead > of using the hash table. The way patch 2 uses the pids is stupid, it was just the easiest way to implement it correctly ;-) I work with, do it stupid but correct first, then optimize. > > It makes me think that task->pid really should go away because with it > there people don't bother to look and see how things normally work. This is far from a fast path, and I can easily fix it. The hard work was the rest of the patch not this part. I even did it stupid knowing that I would be rewriting it to handle namespaces. I stated that this needed to be fixed in the patch itself. One thing I never got an answer for, using the namespace pid path, can I still select the idle task to trace, i.e. pid == 0. -- Steve _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
