Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760752Ab0FQVi2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jun 2010 17:38:28 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:60730 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757679Ab0FQVi1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jun 2010 17:38:27 -0400 Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 23:36:38 +0200 From: Oleg Nesterov To: "Eric W. Biederman" Cc: Pavel Emelyanov , Louis Rilling , Andrew Morton , Pavel Emelyanov , Linux Containers , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] procfs: Do not release pid_ns->proc_mnt too early Message-ID: <20100617213638.GB4182@redhat.com> References: <1276706068-18567-1-git-send-email-louis.rilling@kerlabs.com> <4C19F0A3.2050707@parallels.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 872 Lines: 26 On 06/17, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > The task->children isn't changed until __unhash_process() which runs > after flush_proc_task(). Yes. But this is only the current implementation detail. It would be nice to cleanup the code so that EXIT_DEAD tasks are never sit in ->children list. > So we should be able to come up with > a variant of do_wait() that zap_pid_ns_processes can use that does > what we need. See above... Even if we modify do_wait() or add the new variant, how the caller can wait for EXIT_DEAD tasks? I don't think we want to modify release_task() to do __wake_up_parent() or something similar. Oleg. -- 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/