> On Oct. 17, 2017, 9:11 p.m., Andrei Budnik wrote:
> > src/linux/ns.hpp
> > Lines 246 (patched)
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/63074/diff/1/?file=1860608#file1860608line250>
> >
> >     There might be a race when `stat` has failed, but a new process with 
> > the same PID is launched before `os::exist` is called. This race reproduced 
> > when two pre-exec hooks was started.

Fixed.


- Andrei


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/63074/#review188395
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Oct. 17, 2017, 1:44 p.m., Andrei Budnik wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/63074/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Oct. 17, 2017, 1:44 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Alexander Rukletsov, Jie Yu, and Kevin Klues.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-7504
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-7504
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Previously, `getns` checked existence of the process's pid before
> trying to `stat` the namespace file. If the pid didn't exist, then
> it returned a failure. However, the process might exit before `stat`
> is called.
> 
> Now, `getns` doesn't check existence of the process's pid explicitly.
> The fact that the process is gone can be detected by checking returned
> errno of `stat`: if it returns ENOENT, then the function returns
> `None()`.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/linux/ns.hpp e96116343b132ff4aae36c7b3c1b0e99c41246af 
>   src/slave/containerizer/mesos/utils.cpp 
> ec6d6c79b0f93cabe880cd697094c20e999af4d1 
>   src/tests/containerizer/isolator_tests.cpp 
> 5072bafabc0e37bc756588b88e4d9f8a8c84d337 
>   src/tests/containerizer/ns_tests.cpp 
> 2e28139d241e5e37c8fd0f8b4531c3d271727c8d 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/63074/diff/2/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Andrei Budnik
> 
>

Reply via email to