Re: [PATCH 3/7] Containers (V8): Add generic multi-subsystem API to containers
[ Sorry abt piece meal reviews, I am sending comments as and when I spot something ] On Fri, Apr 06, 2007 at 04:32:24PM -0700, menage@google.com wrote: > -void container_exit(struct task_struct *tsk) > +void container_exit(struct task_struct *tsk, int run_callbacks) > { [snip] > + /* Reassign the task to the init_container_group. */ > task_lock(tsk); [snip] > + if (tsk->containers != &init_container_group) { Is this check needed? If we have the check, then: > + task_unlock(tsk); > + if (cg) > + put_container_group(cg); init_container_group refcount is leaky (fork increments it, but exit doesnt). Not a big prob perhaps, but ..would be nice to avoid? -- Regards, vatsa
On 4/10/07, Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@in.ibm.com> wrote: > [ Sorry abt piece meal reviews, I am sending comments as and when I spot > something ] That's no problem. > > On Fri, Apr 06, 2007 at 04:32:24PM -0700, menage@google.com wrote: > > -void container_exit(struct task_struct *tsk) > > +void container_exit(struct task_struct *tsk, int run_callbacks) > > { > > [snip] > > > + /* Reassign the task to the init_container_group. */ > > task_lock(tsk); > > [snip] > > > + if (tsk->containers != &init_container_group) { > > Is this check needed? If we have the check, then: > > > + task_unlock(tsk); > > + if (cg) > > + put_container_group(cg); > > init_container_group refcount is leaky (fork increments it, but exit > doesnt). Not a big prob perhaps, but ..would be nice to avoid? > Yes, I think you're right - over a long uptime that would just cause problems ... Paul