Thus spake Garrett Wollman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > <<On Wed, 12 Mar 2003 16:51:15 -0800, David Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > > A real problem is that a swapped out process' uarea has to be > > paged back in, even when no memory is available. I don't think > > there's an easy way around that, given that you need the uarea and > > kernel stack to handle the signal. > > But you don't, actually -- at least not to ``handle'' a SIGKILL. In > that case, you should be able to simply destroy the process and free > whatever swap it has been allocated without ever giving it control. > So is the issue that we don't want to send SIGKILL too aggressively, > and send some other signal to give the process a chance to exit > gracefully?
Perhaps you don't technically need it since swapping doesn't swap out very much these days (and should probably go away). But you'd need to make some minor changes to signal delivery, or write a separate mechanism, in order to kill a process without swapping it in. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
