Eric W. Biederman [ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx] wrote: | 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. Eric, Do you plan to resend this patch ? FYI, we ran into the problem that Louis Rilling reported when testing with the checkpoint/restart code and this patch fixes the problem (after a minor tweak to the C/R code). Thanks, Sukadev _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
