Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| On Tue, 7 Aug 2007 00:33:26 +0400 Oleg Nesterov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|
| > On 08/06, Andrew Morton wrote:
| > >
| > > On Fri, 3 Aug 2007 01:20:09 +0400 Oleg Nesterov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > >
| > > > 2. We are playing games with ->nsproxy->pid_ns. This code is bogus
today, and
| > > > it has to be changed anyway when we really support pid namespaces,
just
| > > > remove it.
| > >
| > > This patch broke
| > >
| > > pid-namespaces-define-and-use-task_active_pid_ns-wrapper.patch. This
hunk:
| > >
| > > ***************
| > > *** 908,915 ****
| > > if (unlikely(!tsk->pid))
| > > panic("Attempted to kill the idle task!");
| > > if (unlikely(tsk == child_reaper(tsk))) {
| > > - if (tsk->nsproxy->pid_ns != &init_pid_ns)
| > > - tsk->nsproxy->pid_ns->child_reaper =
init_pid_ns.child_reaper;
| > > else
| > > panic("Attempted to kill init!");
| > > }
| > > --- 908,916 ----
| > > if (unlikely(!tsk->pid))
| > > panic("Attempted to kill the idle task!");
| > > if (unlikely(tsk == child_reaper(tsk))) {
| > > + if (task_active_pid_ns(tsk) != &init_pid_ns)
| > > + task_active_pid_ns(tsk)->child_reaper =
| > > + init_pid_ns.child_reaper;
| > > else
| > > panic("Attempted to kill init!");
| > > }
| > >
| > > has no place to live any more, so I just removed it.
| >
| > Ah, thanks. I should have done this patch against -mm tree.
| >
| > I hope it is OK to drop this chunk of
| > pid-namespaces-define-and-use-task_active_pid_ns-wrapper.patch
| >
| > Because it can't work right now anyway, and Sukadev+Pavel already have
| > new patches on top this one which make namespace switch actually work.
| >
|
| OK, well I had to make a bit of on-the-fly adjustment to
| pid-namespaces-rename-child_reaper-function.patch as well.
|
| The diff-of-the-diff is:
|
| @@ -48,7 +48,7 @@
| diff -puN kernel/exit.c~pid-namespaces-rename-child_reaper-function
kernel/exit.c
| --- a/kernel/exit.c~pid-namespaces-rename-child_reaper-function
| +++ a/kernel/exit.c
| -@@ -694,7 +694,7 @@ forget_original_parent(struct task_struc
| +@@ -683,7 +683,7 @@ forget_original_parent(struct task_struc
| do {
| reaper = next_thread(reaper);
| if (reaper == father) {
| @@ -57,19 +57,10 @@
| break;
| }
| } while (reaper->exit_state);
| -@@ -907,7 +907,7 @@ fastcall NORET_TYPE void do_exit(long co
| - panic("Aiee, killing interrupt handler!");
| - if (unlikely(!tsk->pid))
| - panic("Attempted to kill the idle task!");
| -- if (unlikely(tsk == child_reaper(tsk))) {
| -+ if (unlikely(tsk == task_child_reaper(tsk))) {
| - if (task_active_pid_ns(tsk) != &init_pid_ns)
| - task_active_pid_ns(tsk)->child_reaper =
| - init_pid_ns.child_reaper;
| diff -puN kernel/signal.c~pid-namespaces-rename-child_reaper-function
kernel/signal.c
|
| Hopefully people can re-review and retest what's there in next -mm.
|
| Or if that's too much work or too risky, option b) is to drop
| handle-the-multi-threaded-inits-exit-properly.patch, go back to the
| 2.6.23-rc1-mm2 versions of
| pid-namespaces-define-and-use-task_active_pid_ns-wrapper.patch and
| pid-namespaces-rename-child_reaper-function.patch and to ask Oleg to cook a
2.6.23-rc1-mm2 version of handle-the-multi-threaded-inits-exit-properly.patch.
|
| The downside of this approach is that
| handle-the-multi-threaded-inits-exit-properly.patch looks more 2.6.24-ready
| than all the container stuff (based just on overall impact and
| speculativeness)
Well, if it will help, we can drop these two patches from -mm, take Oleg's
patch and I can then resend these along with other pid ns patches.
pid-namespaces-define-and-use-task_active_pid_ns-wrapper.patch.
pid-namespaces-rename-child_reaper-function.patch
Suka
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
