On 09/03, sukadev@us.ibm.com wrote:
>
> By trying to keep is_current_in_ancestor*() general, I guess it is more
> complicated than it needs to be right now.
> 
> Would holding the rcu_read_lock() be enough or since our callers hold
> it now, can we just drop that too ?

I think rcu_read_lock() is not needed right now, and we can drop it.

Oleg.

_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers