On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 10:11:47AM -0500, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 11:25:11PM -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > > > + /* Short-circuit the easy case - kn_to is the root node. */
> > > > + if ((kn_from == kn_to) || (!kn_from && !kn_to->parent)) {
> > > > + *p = '/';
> > > > + *(p + 1) = '\0';
> > >
> > > Hmm... so if kn_from == kn_to, the output is "/"?
> >
> > Yes, that's what seems to make the most sense for cgroup namespaces. I
> > could see a case for '.' being used instead in general, but for cgroup
> > namespaces I think we'd have to convert those back to '/'. Otherwise
> > we'll fail in being able to run legacy software, which would get
> > confused.
>
> Yeah, I agree but the name is kinda misleading tho. The output isn't
> really a relative path but rather absolute path against the specified
> root. Maybe updating the function and parameter names would be
> helpful?
>
> Thanks.
Ok - updating the comment is simple enough. Though the name/params
kernfs_path_from_node_locked(from, to) still seem to make sense. Would
you prefer something like kernfs_absolute_path_from node_locked()? I
hesitate to call 'from' 'root' since kernfs_root is a thing and this
is not that.
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
