Greg KH wrote:
On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 10:34:01AM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
Lastly, is this a place for krefs? I don't see a real need for a
destructor yet, but the idea is fresh in my mind.
Well, what happens when you drop the last reference to this container?
Right now, your patch doesn't cause anything to happen, and if that's
acceptable, then fine, you don't need to use a struct kref.
But if not, then why have a reference count at all? :)
thanks,
greg k-h
Greg ...
In our pid virtualization patches we removed the object automatically.
I presume that Kirill does the same .... although the code for that is not released.
I am working on converting our pid stuff so to follow the recommendation of Linux/Alan
to just do <container,pid> isolation through pidspaces.
I could release an allocation/ before hand. Based on Kirill's 1/5 patch adoption
(which took Linus's & Dave's naming comments into account)
How do we want to create the container?
In our patch we did it through a /proc/container filesystem.
Which created the container object and then on fork/exec switched over.
How about an additional sys_exec_container( exec_args + "container_name").
This does all the work like exec, but creates new container
with name "..." and attaches task to new container.
If name exists, an error -EEXIST will be raised !
-- Hubertus
-
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]