On 01/17, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > Cedric Le Goater <clg at fr.ibm.com> writes: > > > > your first analysis was correct : exit_task_namespaces() should be moved > > above exit_notify(tsk). It will require some extra fixes for nsproxy > > though. > > I think the only issue is the child_reaper and currently we only have one of > those. When we really do the pid namespace we are going to have to revisit > this. My gut feel says that we won't be able to exit our pid namespace until > the process is waited on. So we may need to break up exit_task_namespace into > individual components. I agree, but please note that the child_reaper is not the only issue. Think about sub-thread which auto-reaps itself. I'd suggest to add the comment in do_exit() after exit_notify() to remind that the task is really dead now, it has no ->signal, it can't be seen in /proc/, we can't send a signal to it, etc. Oleg.
