On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 10:56 -0400, Oren Laadan wrote: > 1) The separate fd-table between the coordinator and the feeder > is just a convenience and can be relatively easily relaxed so > that pthreads may be used. However, ... > > 2) More importantly, malloc() and printf() also occur in the > processes and threads generated during the creation of the new > (restored) task tree. So the same problems may occur there as > well. Unfortunately, here we can't use glibc, in part because > it is not even supported by glibc. > > Maybe a more robust way to address this is to: (1) use mmap() > and munmap() instead of malloc() and free(), and also (2) use > sprintf() + write() instead of printf(). > That should make everything thread-safe. Did you notice other > libc calls which may be problematic ? No, I think you covered it. The only remaining concern I have is whether accesses to global state (like the context) are adequately serialized, and if not, what mechanism could provide mutual exclusion (semaphores?). _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
