[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4AD2EBC7.2020109@fr.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 10:41:43 +0200
From: Daniel Lezcano <dlezcano@...ibm.com>
To: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
andrea@...share.com, "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Linux Containers <containers@...ts.osdl.org>,
Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...nvz.org>
Subject: Re: pidns memory leak
Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
> Ccing Andrea's new email id:
>
> Daniel Lezcano [dlezcano@...ibm.com] wrote:
>
>> Following your explanation I was able to reproduce a simple program
>> added in attachment. But there is something I do not understand is why
>> the leak does not appear if I do the 'lstat' (cf. test program) in the
>> pid 2 context.
>>
>
> Hmm, are you sure there is no leak with this test program ? If I put back
> the commit (7766755a2f249e7), I do see a leak in all three data structures
> (pid_2, proc_inode, pid_namespace).
>
Let me clarify :)
The program leaks with the commit 7766755a2f249e7 and does not leak
without this commit.
This is the expected behaviour and this simple program spots the problem.
I tried to modify the program and I moved the lstat to the process 2 in
the child namespace. Conforming your analysis, I was expecting to see a
leak too, but this one didn't occur. I was wondering why, maybe there is
something I didn't understood in the analysis.
Thanks
-- Daniel
--
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