Paul Menage wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 10:16 PM, Andrew Morton
> <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>>  > > Maybe it would be better to not do a cgroup_exit() until we're
>>  > > unhashed, so that cgroup_enable_task_cg_list() can't find the exiting
>>  > > task?
>>
>>  So we won't be doing what Paul suggested?
>>
> 
> It's not as high a priority as Li's bug fix (which may be a good
> candidate for 2.6.25.1) but for the future I think I'll implement this
> distinguished css_set pointer for tasks that have finished
> cgroup_exit(), since I think it will make the similar synchronization
> in attach_task() cleaner, as well as cgroup_enable_task_cg_list().
> 

Yes, this approach sounds good to me. :)

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