On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 08:45:37AM -0700, Paul Menage wrote: > Whilst I've got no objection in general to using nsproxy rather than > the container_group object that I introduced in my latest patches, I > think that Vatsa's approach of losing the general container object is > flawed, since it loses any kind of per-group generic state (e.g. "this > container is being deleted")
I think I should post the updated version what I have soon. It handles the "container/task group being deleted" case well, by setting task/ns_proxy->count = 0. The only problem I need to resolve is notify_on_release support (and also I haven't looked at the resource conters patches yet). > and last time I saw it, I think it would > tend to lose processes so that they didn't show up in any directory in > the container fs. I think these are fixed in the latest version I have. Will send out to you later this week (as soon as I drag myself off a higher prio task!). -- Regards, vatsa - 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/
