On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 5:19 PM, Al Viro <v...@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote: > > So you can't wrap sget() into a mutex that might be grabbed at some > point of ->kill_sb() or it'll wait forever in that scenario.
Good point. > > So no exclusion is needed there at all. If you don't want later remount > of the first mount to affect these flags of second one you shouldn't share > the superblock at all, obviously... I have plans for some slightly more complex state in that structure - I'll probably just add a spinlock around accesses to those fields so that we can avoid exposing any inconsistent state. Paul _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list contain...@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@openvz.org https://openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
