On Sun, Nov 14, 2004 at 12:11:58AM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote: >When I get the code to a point that it can run configure, I'll do a >benchmark and see how bad this technique is. If there is not a >noticeable degradation, I think I'll probably duplicate the scenario of >last year and checkin this revamp which, I believe will eliminate the >security problem that you were talking about.
Well, my initial implementation was a little slower than 1.5.12, which was encouraging since there was still stuff that I could do to speed things up. For instance, it occurred to me that all of the synchronization in spawn_guts and waitsig could go away (with one exception), so I got rid of it. And, things got a little slower. So, I realized that I could get rid of a thread synchronization problem by always putting the pinfo for the new process in an static array. This also eliminated the need to do anything other than send a signal when the child was stopped or terminated. I was getting pretty excited about all of the code that was disappearing until I ran the benchmark. Yep. Things are *a lot* slower now. Time for bed and dreams about threads and processes... cgf