From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1767012AbXDEOil (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Apr 2007 10:38:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1767015AbXDEOil (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Apr 2007 10:38:41 -0400 Received: from e36.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.154]:51909 "EHLO e36.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1767012AbXDEOik (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Apr 2007 10:38:40 -0400 Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2007 20:16:09 +0530 From: Srivatsa Vaddagiri To: "Paul Menage" Cc: sekharan@us.ibm.com, ckrm-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xemul@sw.ru, rohitseth@google.com, pj@sgi.com, "Eric W. Biederman" , mbligh@google.com, winget@google.com, containers@lists.osdl.org, "Serge E. Hallyn" , dev@sw.ru, devel@openvz.org Subject: Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH 7/7] containers (V7): Container interface to nsproxy subsystem Message-ID: <20070405144609.GJ28414@in.ibm.com> Reply-To: vatsa@in.ibm.com References: <20070404051526.GA16562@in.ibm.com> <6599ad830704040000of7f1197ica543e14d290509e@mail.gmail.com> <20070404172643.GA28328@in.ibm.com> <6599ad830704041957y7b81c4ecrd21f4c08b9d7c72d@mail.gmail.com> <20070405063950.GA3435@in.ibm.com> <6599ad830704042348q5675c01ep92679fb3275bafac@mail.gmail.com> <20070405084920.GB20356@in.ibm.com> <6599ad830704050229q1d4d1ef9ved0e58b93aef31ff@mail.gmail.com> <20070405124325.GA13822@in.ibm.com> <6599ad830704050713h34752b1cted9dbe1ff7ab8bec@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6599ad830704050713h34752b1cted9dbe1ff7ab8bec@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 07:13:37AM -0700, Paul Menage wrote: > > ns should have a refcount of 1 to begin with. > > Right - that's my point, you're effectively passing the initial > refcount of the nsproxy to the container directory's d_fsdata > reference. sure .. > > Basically I am struggling to answer "How can a zero refcount (beancounter) > > object go non-zero when zero tasks are attached to it" .. > > In that case, I think you're fine. Your last posted patches didn't > provide a way to check for that, though, as far as I could see. Yes, the last patch I posted is very primitive considering all the discussions we had ..For ex: attach_task() in the last patch has more bugs [apart from the exit race I found recently with cpusets/containers] Each time I stopped and stared at attach_task() I could find a bug .. -- Regards, vatsa