rather this will also suffice
if (* pid == NULL*) {
retval = -ENOMEM;
pid = alloc_pid(p->nsproxy->pid_ns);
if (!pid)
goto bad_fork_cleanup_io;
}
p->pid = pid_nr(pid);
On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 4:57 PM, Ni
If I do the following thing:
struct pid remote_struct_pid;
remote_struct_pid.numbers[0].nr=*my_pid*;
p = copy_process(clone_flags, stack_start, stack_size, child_tidptr,
*remote_struct_pid*, trace, tls);
and modify the copy_process function little bit (marked in BOLD), it may
serve my objective.
On Die, 2016-03-22 at 01:26 -0400, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 16:01:41 +0530, Nitin Varyani said:
>
> > I am running a master user-level process at Computer 1 which sends a
> > process context like code, data, registers, PC, etc as well as *"pid"* to
> > slave processes r
On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 02:07:29AM -0700, Nitin Varyani wrote:
> Hi,
> The linux kernel attaches a pid to newly forked process. I want to
> create a facility by which a process has the option of attaching a new pid
> to its child which is not in the pid space.
> Any suggestions of how th
On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 16:01:41 +0530, Nitin Varyani said:
> I am running a master user-level process at Computer 1 which sends a
> process context like code, data, registers, PC, etc as well as *"pid"* to
> slave processes running at other computers. The responsibility of the slave
> process is to f
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 4:34 PM, Nitin Varyani wrote:
> struct task_struct {
> volatile long state;
> void *stack;
> ...
> pid_t pid;
> ...
> }
> You mean to say that just mapping the pid_t pid will do the job. Does the
> linux kernel not store pid somewhere else while forking a child?
No I mean
struct task_struct {
volatile long state;
void *stack;
...
*pid_t pid;*
...
}
You mean to say that just mapping the *pid_t pid* will do the job. Does
the linux kernel not store pid somewhere else while forking a child?
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 4:18 PM, Pranay Srivastava
wrote:
> Nitin,
>
>
> On
A representative process, that is, a process without any user stack,
register values, PC, etc, with *"pid" *is maintained at the master node.
Now, the process which was migrated to a remote node, in this example
Computer 2, and having process id *"pid", *decides to fork(). It is a
system call and i
.Continued That is, if kernel at Computer 2 finds that pid of a
process requesting a system call is 1500, the request is forwarded to slave
daemon which in turn contacts with the master daemon. Master daemon
requests the kernel for the system call and sends the result back to slave
daemon.
I am trying to create a distributed pid space.
0 to 2000 Computer 1
2001 to 4000 Computer 2
4001 to 6000 Computer 3
and so on...
I am running a master user-level process at Computer 1 which sends a
process context like code, data, registers, PC, etc as well as *"pid"* to
slave processes running
On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 10:33:44 +0530, Nitin Varyani said:
> Sub-task 1: Until now, parent process cannot control the pid of the forked
> child. A pid gets assigned as a sequential number by the kernel at the time
> the process is forked . I want to modify kernel in such a way that parent
> process c
I am reframing my question:
Sub-task 1: Until now, parent process cannot control the pid of the forked
child. A pid gets assigned as a sequential number by the kernel at the time
the process is forked . I want to modify kernel in such a way that parent
process can control the pid of the forked chil
On Sun, 20 Mar 2016 02:07:29 -0700, Nitin Varyani said:
> The linux kernel attaches a pid to newly forked process. I want to
> create a facility by which a process has the option of attaching a new pid
> to its child which is not in the pid space.
Not at all sure what you mean by "not in the
Hi,
The linux kernel attaches a pid to newly forked process. I want to
create a facility by which a process has the option of attaching a new pid
to its child which is not in the pid space.
Any suggestions of how this can be achieved?
Nitin
___
14 matches
Mail list logo
