[Devel] Re: [PATCH] c/r: Add AF_UNIX support (v3)

[Oren Laadan]

Dan Smith wrote:
> OL> Ahh.. and forgot to ask/mention: you do need to call
> OL> sock_unix_unlink() before attempting bind(), for the reasons we
> OL> had discussed earlier (consider same example as above,
> OL> checkpoint/restart done before the unlink(), then restart will
> OL> otherwise fail).
> 
> I thought we agreed that was userspace's job?  That's why I didn't
> unlink() before bind() in this version (4) of the patch either.
> 

I don't recall such a conclusion.

I argued that it it's kernel's job. I suppose we agree that such
pathnames should always be unlinked - so it isn't policy based.
Therefore, I don't see a good reason to have userspace scan the
checkpoint image data just to find such sockets and make them
disappear ...

Oren.




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