On 08/03/2016 05:54 PM, Pavel Emelyanov wrote: > On 08/03/2016 05:17 PM, Nikolay Borisov wrote: >> >> [SNIP] >> >> [CCing some people from openvz/CRIU] > > Thanks :) > >> My train of thought was "we should have means which would be the one >> universal truth about everything and this would be a process in the >> init_pid_ns". I don't have strong preference as long as I'm not breaking >> userspace. As I said before - I think the CRIU guys might be using that >> interface. > > This particular change won't break us mostly because we've switched to > reading the /proc/pid/fdinfo/n files for locks.
[thinking out loud here] I've never actually looked into those files but now that I have it seems to make sense to also switch 'lsof' to actually reading the locks from the available pids directories rather than relying on the global /proc/locks interface. Oh well :) [/thinking out loud here] > > -- Pavel > >>> >>>>>> + && (proc_pidns != ns_of_pid(fl->fl_nspid))) >>>>> + return 0; >>>> + >>>>> lock_get_status(f, fl, iter->li_pos, ""); >>>> >>>>> list_for_each_entry(bfl, &fl->fl_block, fl_block) >>> >> . >> > > _______________________________________________ > Containers mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers >
