Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 07/26, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
This is a fix for Sukadev's patch that moved the alloc_pid() call from
do_fork() into copy_process().
... and this patch changes almost every line from Sukadev's patch.
It does. My bad :( I have reviewed Suka's patch badly and was sure it
puts the alloc_pid() right where we need this.
Sorry gents, but isn't it better to ask Andrew to drop that patch
(which is quite useless by itself), and send a new one which incorporates
all necessary changes? Imho, it would be much easier to understand.
Hm... Maybe it's better to ask him to fold these patches together?
@@ -1406,7 +1422,13 @@ long do_fork(unsigned long clone_flags,
if (!IS_ERR(p)) {
struct completion vfork;
- nr = pid_nr(task_pid(p));
+ /*
+ * this is enough to call pid_nr_ns here, but this if
+ * improves optimisation of regular fork()
+ */
+ nr = (clone_flags & CLONE_NEWPID) ?
+ task_pid_nr_ns(p, current->nsproxy->pid_ns) :
+ task_pid_vnr(p);
Shouldn't we do the same for CLONE_PARENT_SETTID in copy_process() ?
Otherwise *parent_tidptr may have a wrong value which doesn't match
to what fork() returns.
Oops. We should. Thanks :)
Oleg.
Thanks,
Pavel
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
