On 06/16, Louis Rilling wrote: > > On 16/06/11 15:00 +0200, Greg Kurz wrote: > > peeking into pid->numbers. > > It ends like open-coding an optimized version of task_pid_vnr(). If the > optimization is really important (I guess this depends on the depth of recursive > pid namespaces), it would be better to re-write task_pid_vnr(). No, task_pid_vnr(p) is different, it should use the caller's namespace. Just in case, I agree there is no need to optimize this code. The simpler the better. I mentioned pid->numbers[pid->level] just to point that all we need is task_pid() itself, there are no subtle races which need the locking. Oleg. _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
