On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 4:24 AM, Louis Rilling<Louis.Rilling@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > You meant signal_struct, right? sighand_struct can be shared by several > thread groups, while signal_struct can't. > No, I meant sighand_struct. I realise that it *can* be shared between processes, but I didn't think that NPTL actually did so. (Are there common cases of this happening?) And in cases where it was shared, it wouldn't affect correctness, but simply create the potential for a little more contention. I agree that signal_struct might in principle be a better place for it, but the first cacheline of signal_struct appears to be occupied with performance-sensitive things (a couple of counters and a queue used in do_wait()) already, whereas the first cacheline of sighand_struct only appears to be used incremented/decremented during fork/exit, and when delivering a bunch of mostly-fatal signals. But having said that, if having it in signal_struct isn't considered a potential performance hit, it would be fine there too. Paul _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
