Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 07/26, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
This is a fix for Sukadev's patch that moved the alloc_pid() call from
do_fork() into copy_process().

... and this patch changes almost every line from Sukadev's patch.

It does. My bad :( I have reviewed Suka's patch badly and was sure it
puts the alloc_pid() right where we need this.

Sorry gents, but isn't it better to ask Andrew to drop that patch
(which is quite useless by itself), and send a new one which incorporates
all necessary changes? Imho, it would be much easier to understand.

Hm... Maybe it's better to ask him to fold these patches together?

@@ -1406,7 +1422,13 @@ long do_fork(unsigned long clone_flags,
        if (!IS_ERR(p)) {
                struct completion vfork;

-               nr = pid_nr(task_pid(p));
+               /*
+                * this is enough to call pid_nr_ns here, but this if
+                * improves optimisation of regular fork()
+                */
+               nr = (clone_flags & CLONE_NEWPID) ?
+                       task_pid_nr_ns(p, current->nsproxy->pid_ns) :
+                               task_pid_vnr(p);

Shouldn't we do the same for CLONE_PARENT_SETTID in copy_process() ?
Otherwise *parent_tidptr may have a wrong value which doesn't match
to what fork() returns.

Oops. We should. Thanks :)

Oleg.

Thanks,
Pavel

_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Reply via email to