[Devel] Re: [RFC][PATCH] Do not set /proc inode->pid for non-pid-related inodes

[Eric W. Biederman]

Dave Hansen <hansendc at us.ibm.com> writes:

> On Tue, 2007-03-20 at 09:51 -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> Outlive is the wrong concept.  Ideally we want something that will
>> live as long as there are processes in the pid_ns. 
>
> How about they just live as long as there is a mount?  Now that we _can_
> have multiple superblocks and meaningful vfsmounts, I think it's time to
> make it act like a normal filesystem.  

Agreed.

My concern is that the mount will outlive the pid namespace.  In which
case we need something that is safe to test when the pid namespace goes
away.

Eric
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers at lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers