Re: thread ids, task ids and subsystems

[Marcus Brinkmann]

On Mon, Apr 07, 2003 at 05:20:06PM +0200, Niels Möller wrote:
> Marcus Brinkmann <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> > Let us say that this belongs into its own interface, and I agree.  If there
> > should be two distinct server processes, or one process implementing two
> > interfaces, that is something I am contemplating.
> 
> That sounds perfectly reasonably to me. That should make it possible,
> for instance, for one user process to use the system's task-and-proc
> server for the task-interface, and at the same time use its own custom
> proc server.

Yes, exactly.
 
> > But it means that proc needs to get a list of all tasks to be able to show
> > them in ps.
> 
> My mental model is that unregistered tasks always "belong" to some
> process (by the automatic inheritance of the "accounting id" in the
> task server). When a process dies, all unregistered tasks belonging to
> it will be automatically killed as well (by a single call to the task
> server). Then the proc server doesn't need to know anything about the
> individual unregistered tasks, just like it doesn't need to know about
> individual threads.

That is an interesting idea, although I think you still would want to be
able to see each tasks individual information (as much as is available,
which is usually not much, but could include information like run time and
memory usage even if the task is not registered), and be able to kill them
individually (and debug them!).

> But I guess that's quite different from how the current proc deals
> with unregistered tasks.

Well, we really have freedom here.  There is no precedence (the current Hurd
is quite simple in that regard).

Thanks,
Marcus

-- 
`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' GNU      http://www.gnu.org    address@hidden
Marcus Brinkmann              The Hurd http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/
address@hidden
http://www.marcus-brinkmann.de/