On 4/10/07, Srivatsa Vaddagiri <[email protected]> wrote:
[ Sorry abt piece meal reviews, I am sending comments as and when I spot
something ]
That's no problem.
On Fri, Apr 06, 2007 at 04:32:24PM -0700, [email protected] wrote:
> -void container_exit(struct task_struct *tsk)
> +void container_exit(struct task_struct *tsk, int run_callbacks)
> {
[snip]
> + /* Reassign the task to the init_container_group. */
> task_lock(tsk);
[snip]
> + if (tsk->containers != &init_container_group) {
Is this check needed? If we have the check, then:
> + task_unlock(tsk);
> + if (cg)
> + put_container_group(cg);
init_container_group refcount is leaky (fork increments it, but exit
doesnt). Not a big prob perhaps, but ..would be nice to avoid?
Yes, I think you're right - over a long uptime that would just cause
problems ...
Paul
-
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]
