On 17/06/10 23:36 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > On 06/17, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > > > The task->children isn't changed until __unhash_process() which runs > > after flush_proc_task(). > > Yes. But this is only the current implementation detail. > It would be nice to cleanup the code so that EXIT_DEAD tasks are > never sit in ->children list. > > > So we should be able to come up with > > a variant of do_wait() that zap_pid_ns_processes can use that does > > what we need. > > See above... > > Even if we modify do_wait() or add the new variant, how the caller > can wait for EXIT_DEAD tasks? I don't think we want to modify > release_task() to do __wake_up_parent() or something similar. Indeed, I was thinking about calling __wake_up_parent() from release_task() once parent->children becomes empty. Not sure about the performance impact though. Maybe some WAIT_NO_CHILDREN flag in parent->signal could limit it. But if EXIT_DEAD children are removed from ->children before release_task(), I'm afraid that this becomes impossible. Thanks, Louis -- Dr Louis Rilling Kerlabs Skype: louis.rilling Batiment Germanium Phone: (+33|0) 6 80 89 08 23 80 avenue des Buttes de Coesmes http://www.kerlabs.com/ 35700 Rennes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
