Louis Rilling <Louis.Rilling@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > This patch looks like it is working (only a small RCU issue shown below). I > couldn't try it yet though. It certainly worked in my testing. > I must admit that I am using a similar back-off solution in Kerrighed (not to > solve the issue of proc_flush_task(), but for one of the reasons that you stated > above: we want to be sure that all tasks of the namespace have been reaped), but > I considered it too ugly to propose it for Linux ;) Well sometimes you have to go with what works. Thanks for spotting those issue with my patch. I guess it needs one more pass before I can call it done. > That said, this is probably the least intrusive solution we have seen yet. Thanks for the review. The bug where processes can escape a pid namespace is really the reason I did it this way. I also have the patches needed to cleanly fix the pid namespace ref counting. (Hopefully I can get them posted soon). So if there was just the ref counting bug I would drop this patch. Eric _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
