On 09/25, Gargi Sharma wrote:
>
> void zap_pid_ns_processes(struct pid_namespace *pid_ns)
> {
> - int nr;
> + int nr = 2;
> int rc;
> struct task_struct *task, *me = current;
> int init_pids = thread_group_leader(me) ? 1 : 2;
> + struct pid *pid;
>
> /* Don't allow any more processes into the pid namespace */
> disable_pid_allocation(pid_ns);
> @@ -240,8 +230,8 @@ void zap_pid_ns_processes(struct pid_namespace *pid_ns)
> *
> */
> read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
> - nr = next_pidmap(pid_ns, 1);
> - while (nr > 0) {
> + pid = idr_get_next(&pid_ns->idr, &nr);
> + while (pid) {
> rcu_read_lock();
>
> task = pid_task(find_vpid(nr), PIDTYPE_PID);
> @@ -250,7 +240,8 @@ void zap_pid_ns_processes(struct pid_namespace *pid_ns)
>
> rcu_read_unlock();
>
> - nr = next_pidmap(pid_ns, nr);
> + nr++;
> + pid = idr_get_next(&pid_ns->idr, &nr);
> }
> read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
Then you should probably rewrite this code using idr_for_each_entry_continue() ?
And why do you need find_vpid(nr) if you already have "pid" ?
Oleg.
