On Sun, Sep 10, 2006 at 11:12:49AM -0700, Pete Zaitcev wrote:
> On Sat, 09 Sep 2006 22:42:10 -0600, ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) wrote:
> 
> > The problem by remember a user space process by it's pid it is
> > possible that the process will exit, pid wrap around will occur and a
> > different process will appear in it's place.
> 
> ... which is completely all right in this case. We used to have an
> implementation which tried to hold onto the task_struct and that sucked.
> It is only possible for the task to disappear without notifying devio
> under very special conditions only, which involve forking with parent
> exiting. In other words, even a buggy application won't trigger this
> without deliberately trying. And when it happens, uid checks make sure
> that other users are not affected.
> 
> >  Holding a reference
> > to a struct pid avoid that problem, and paves the way
> > for implementing a pid namespace.
> 
> That may be useful.
> 
> The patch itself seems straightforward if we can trust your struct
> pid thingies. If OpenVZ people approve, I don't mind.

perfectly fine from my side

best,
Herbert

> -- Pete
> _______________________________________________
> Containers mailing list
> Containers@lists.osdl.org
> https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@lists.osdl.org
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/containers