> CLONE_VM seems to work for the use cases you had in mind.
>
> There would have to be a *pretty* convincing story why we would want more
> complexity in the kernel to handle this.
>
> Some smaller performance improvements are not worth it.
Having thought about it more, I agree. I have a workload of my own,
which as you say, I can simply fix using the CLONE_VM way.
The only kind of user which the shadow process thing does not cover
is someone who does not have control over the source of task over
which they want such a behaviour. Here, the only case I can think
of is operators who cannot modify or wrap the processes they're managing.
I dont have that user.
So, instead of further argument or sending benchmarks that would
show a performance delta, does anyone on the list have such a
use case? If not, I would consider my questions as answered.
Thanks
Aditya
