From 45d76dc1c4c523d5773b154f3d01a4a8b8ccb769 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Thomas Schwinge Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 09:04:14 +0100 Subject: glibc/signal/discussion: Suitability of a linked list for _hurd_sigstates? --- glibc/signal/discussion.mdwn | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+) create mode 100644 glibc/signal/discussion.mdwn (limited to 'glibc') diff --git a/glibc/signal/discussion.mdwn b/glibc/signal/discussion.mdwn new file mode 100644 index 00000000..064c1c5b --- /dev/null +++ b/glibc/signal/discussion.mdwn @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ +[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc."]] + +[[!meta license="""[[!toggle id="license" text="GFDL 1.2+"]][[!toggleable +id="license" text="Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this +document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or +any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant +Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license +is included in the section entitled [[GNU Free Documentation +License|/fdl]]."]]"""]] + + +# `_hurd_sigstates` + +In an [[hurd/translator/ext2fs]] instance with 1068 threads, `_hurd_sigstates` +was a linked with with 1067 entries, in one with 351 threads, 351 entries. Is +this noticeable already? Perhaps a different data structure is needed? +Though, a linked list is perfect for the common case of processes with only a +handful of threads. -- cgit v1.2.3