Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH 7/7] containers (V7): Container interface to nsproxy subsystem

Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2007-04-03T16:08:39Z

On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 08:45:37AM -0700, Paul Menage wrote:
> Whilst I've got no objection in general to using nsproxy rather than
> the container_group object that I introduced in my latest patches, I
> think that Vatsa's approach of losing the general container object is
> flawed, since it loses any kind of per-group generic state (e.g. "this
> container is being deleted")

I think I should post the updated version what I have soon. It handles
the "container/task group being deleted" case well, by setting
task/ns_proxy->count = 0. The only problem I need to resolve is
notify_on_release support (and also I haven't looked at the resource conters
patches yet).

> and last time I saw it, I think it would
> tend to lose processes so that they didn't show up in any directory in
> the container fs.

I think these are fixed in the latest version I have. Will send out to
you later this week (as soon as I drag myself off a higher prio task!).

--
Regards,
vatsa