[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20141126235416.GA32688@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 00:54:16 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@...hat.com>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>,
Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@...ntu.com>,
Sterling Alexander <stalexan@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 0/2] exit/pid_ns: comments + simple fix
To remind, this doesn't depend on other changes in -mm.
It is not clear to me if I addressed Eric's objections or not, but let
me send V2 (I reordered these patches).
I updated the changelog/comments in 2/2, hopefully now it is more clear
that this patch only tries to explain how the current code works, and why
do we need to wait for nr_hashed==init_pids from the kernel perspective.
Otherwise it is basically the same patch, except I added another note
about sys_wait4().
And, Eric, let me repeat. In any case we do not need for EXIT_DEAD tasks.
They are stealth. In fact this state should die, it only complicates
do_wait/reparenting/etc but we can't avoid it right now (mostly because
of the locking in wait paths).
IOW. If we could somehow detect that this pid_ns has only EXIT_DEAD tasks
we could return and user-space won't notice this change. No, it is not
that I think we should do this, but this should be documented.
Please review.
Oleg.
--
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