From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756674AbZBIRfw (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Feb 2009 12:35:52 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755354AbZBIRfm (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Feb 2009 12:35:42 -0500 Received: from mail-ew0-f21.google.com ([209.85.219.21]:47760 "EHLO mail-ew0-f21.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754981AbZBIRfl (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Feb 2009 12:35:41 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=Kzjhpoi7qNCpoYDAFnAWkYkbgQAwYVInVwyDVqqU4kp1Tw0WMtQEqcr1IWVkhqagvx hRdsfB+OMbfF15uunYUSd1QoewvCHDzhKaGR2KEKj5EC+46362kAotZiiIR6xnLhPJW/ X6V3buGQK+8G/TzpkmRTWp8Eyz7x1b1qwTtTg= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20090209173427.GC6802@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20090206030543.GB8560@Krystal> <20090206045841.GA12995@Krystal> <20090206130640.GB10918@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20090206163432.GF10918@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20090208224419.GA19512@Krystal> <20090209041153.GR7120@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20090209045352.GA28653@Krystal> <20090209131653.GS7120@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <36ca99e90902090919r297ad4c3re2248c321b36baf8@mail.gmail.com> <20090209173427.GC6802@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 18:35:38 +0100 Message-ID: <36ca99e90902090935u7fef1cb1g27303e546527e3d8@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [RFC git tree] Userspace RCU (urcu) for Linux (repost) From: Bert Wesarg To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers , ltt-dev@lists.casi.polymtl.ca, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Robert Wisniewski Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 18:34, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 06:19:45PM +0100, Bert Wesarg wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 14:16, Paul E. McKenney >> wrote: >> > On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 11:53:52PM -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: >> >> Yes, I guess the signal is not so bad. >> > >> > Now if there were a /proc entry that listed out the tids of the >> > currently running threads, then it might be possible to do something, >> > especially for applications with many more threads than CPUs. >> >> Do you mean something like: `ls /proc/$pid/tasks/*`? Or is this not >> atomic enough? > > Won't that give me all the threads rather than only the ones currently > running? What do you mean by 'running'? Bert > > Thanx, Paul >