Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750729AbWAXVPm (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jan 2006 16:15:42 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750730AbWAXVPm (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jan 2006 16:15:42 -0500 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:13752 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750729AbWAXVPl (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jan 2006 16:15:41 -0500 Subject: Re: RFC [patch 13/34] PID Virtualization Define new task_pid api From: Arjan van de Ven To: Alan Cox Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" , Hubertus Franke , Dave Hansen , Greg KH , "Serge E. Hallyn" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Cedric Le Goater In-Reply-To: <1138137060.14675.73.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20060117143258.150807000@sergelap> <20060117143326.283450000@sergelap> <1137511972.3005.33.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <20060117155600.GF20632@sergelap.austin.ibm.com> <1137513818.14135.23.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1137518714.5526.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060118045518.GB7292@kroah.com> <1137601395.7850.9.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43D14578.6060801@watson.ibm.com> <43D52592.8080709@watson.ibm.com> <1138050684.24808.29.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1138062125.24808.47.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1138137060.14675.73.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 22:15:05 +0100 Message-Id: <1138137305.2977.92.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 (2.2.3-2.fc4) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1139 Lines: 26 On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 21:11 +0000, Alan Cox wrote: > On Maw, 2006-01-24 at 12:26 -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > There is at least NFS lockd that appreciates having a single integer > > per process unique identifier. So there is a practical basis for > > wanting such a thing. > > Which gets us back to refcounting. > > > At least for this first round I think talking about a kpid > > as a container, pid pair makes a lot of sense for the moment, as > > the other implementations just confuse things. > > As an abstract object a kpid to me means a single identifier which > uniquely identifies the process and which in its component parts be they > pointers or not uniquely identifies the process in the container and the > container in the system, both correctly refcounted against re-use. they why not just straight use the task struct pointer for this? It's guaranteed unique.. ;) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/