On Sun, 04 Dec 2011, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > * V3 > - removed lock and serialization of pid_ns_reboot > * V2 > - added a lock for the pid namespace to prevent racy call > to the 'reboot' syscall > - Moved 'reboot' command assigned in zap_pid_ns_processes > instead of wait_task_zombie > - added tasklist lock around force_sig > - added do_exit in pid_ns_reboot > - used task_active_pid_ns instead of declaring a new variable in sys_reboot > - moved code up before POWER_OFF changed to HALT in sys_reboot Daniel, can you address Miquel's concern? Is it a valid concern, or not? I assume CAP_REBOOT functionality is still in place inside the container, so it really does look like userspace would need to know whether it should drop CAP_REBOOT or not, in order to automatically use the new feature. -- "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
