[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <49B2D23C.8000004@free.fr>
Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2009 20:59:56 +0100
From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...e.fr>
To: Greg Kurz <gkurz@...ibm.com>
CC: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Containers <containers@...ts.osdl.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>, roland@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7][v8] Container-init signal semantics
Greg Kurz wrote:
> On Sat, 2009-03-07 at 20:43 +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>
>> case LINUX_REBOOT_CMD_HALT:
>> - kernel_halt();
>> - unlock_kernel();
>> - do_exit(0);
>> + if (power_off_pid_ns(current->nsproxy->pid_ns)) {
>> + kernel_halt();
>> + unlock_kernel();
>> + do_exit(0);
>> + }
>>
>
> Even if current will get SIGKILLed when zap_pid_ns_processes() is
> called, I see no reason it doesn't call do_exit(0).
Right and unlock_kernel too :)
>
>> break;
>>
>> case LINUX_REBOOT_CMD_POWER_OFF:
>> - kernel_power_off();
>> - unlock_kernel();
>> - do_exit(0);
>> + if (power_off_pid_ns(current->nsproxy->pid_ns)) {
>> + kernel_power_off();
>> + unlock_kernel();
>> + do_exit(0);
>> + }
>>
>
> Same.
>
>
>> break;
>>
>>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists