OpenVZ Forum


Home » Mailing lists » Devel » [RFC][PATCH] Do not set /proc inode->pid for non-pid-related inodes
Re: [RFC][PATCH] Do not set /proc inode->pid for non-pid-related inodes [message #17950 is a reply to message #17940] Wed, 21 March 2007 20:29 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
serue is currently offline  serue
Messages: 750
Registered: February 2006
Senior Member
Quoting Eric W. Biederman (ebiederm@xmission.com):
> Cedric Le Goater <clg@fr.ibm.com> writes:
> 
> >>> what about a kthread that would be spawned when a task is cloned in an 
> >>> unshared pid namespace ? This is an extra cost in term of tasks.
> >> 
> >> If you use kernel_thread this can happen. (Die kernel_thread).
> >> If you use the kthread interface keventd will be the parent process and
> >> we won't have problems.  
> >
> > so is it something acceptable for mainline ? I think openvz has such
> > a thread doing the reaping.
> 
> Please clarify.  Is what acceptable for mainline?

I think Cedric is thinking about a per-pidnamespace reaper thread.

I think you and I are just thinking of walking a list of all the
processes with a pid in the namespace, and killing each.

-serge
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Re: Re: Linux-VServer example results for sharing vs. separate mappings ...
Next Topic: [PATCH] Correct accept(2) recovery after sock_attach_fd()
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Fri Sep 05 08:44:54 GMT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.10385 seconds