From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dave Hansen Subject: Re: [BIG RFC] Filesystem-based checkpoint Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2008 09:48:29 -0800 Message-ID: <1225734509.12673.445.camel@nimitz> References: <1225219047.12673.182.camel@nimitz> <1225411757.12673.383.camel@nimitz> <1225462902.12673.398.camel@nimitz> <1225732999.12673.442.camel@nimitz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1225732999.12673.442.camel@nimitz> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: containers-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org Errors-To: containers-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org To: "Eric W. Biederman" Cc: containers List-Id: containers.vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2008-11-03 at 09:23 -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: > The problem is that we can't possibly use refcounts (at least the ones > we have today) alone. For instance, with the pid namespace, we would > have 1 ref for the 'init' process doing the sys_restore() call and then > a possible second refcount for /proc. Perhaps we could differentiate > references to namespaces that instantiate objects inside the namespaces > from purely references to the namespace *itself*. By this, I mean something along the lines of 'mm_struct's mm_users vs. mm_count. -- Dave