On Fri, 2007-10-26 at 14:37 -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> +static int pid_in_pid_ns(struct pid *pid, struct pid_namespace *ns)
> +{
> + return pid && (ns->level <= pid->level) &&
> + pid->numbers[ns->level].ns == ns;
> +}
Could we blow this out a little bit? (I think the blown-out version
lends itself to being better commented, and easier to read.) Also, can
we think of any better name for this? It seems a bit funky that:
pid_in_pid_ns(mypid, &init_pid_ns);
would _ever_ return 0. So, it isn't truly a test for belonging *in* a
namespace, but having that namespace be the lowest level one. I think
Suka toyed with calling it an "active" or "primary" pid namespace. That
differentiated mere membership in a pid namespace from the one that
actually molds that pid's view of the world.
static int pid_in_pid_ns(struct pid *pid, struct pid_namespace *ns)
{
if (!pid)
return 0;
if (ns->level > pid->level)
return 0;
if (pid->numbers[ns->level].ns != ns)
return 0;
return 1;
}
-- Dave
-
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]
