Re: [RFC v17][PATCH 22/60] c/r: external checkpoint of a task other than ourself
From: Serge E. Hallyn <hidden>
Date: 2009-07-23 15:23:46
Also in:
linux-mm, lkml
Quoting Oren Laadan (orenl@librato.com):
+/* setup checkpoint-specific parts of ctx */
+static int init_checkpoint_ctx(struct ckpt_ctx *ctx, pid_t pid)
+{
+ struct task_struct *task;
+ struct nsproxy *nsproxy;
+ int ret;
+
+ /*
+ * No need for explicit cleanup here, because if an error
+ * occurs then ckpt_ctx_free() is eventually called.
+ */
+
+ ctx->root_pid = pid;
+
+ /* root task */
+ read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
+ task = find_task_by_vpid(pid);
+ if (task)
+ get_task_struct(task);
+ read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
+ if (!task)
+ return -ESRCH;
+ else
+ ctx->root_task = task;
+
+ /* root nsproxy */
+ rcu_read_lock();
+ nsproxy = task_nsproxy(task);
+ if (nsproxy)
+ get_nsproxy(nsproxy);
+ rcu_read_unlock();
+ if (!nsproxy)
+ return -ESRCH;
+ else
+ ctx->root_nsproxy = nsproxy;
+
+ /* root freezer */
+ ctx->root_freezer = task;
+ geT_task_struct(task);
+
+ ret = may_checkpoint_task(ctx, task);
+ if (ret) {
+ ckpt_write_err(ctx, NULL);
+ put_task_struct(task);
+ put_task_struct(task);
+ put_nsproxy(nsproxy);I don't think this is safe - the ckpt_ctx_free() will free them a second time because you're not setting them to NULL, right?
+ return ret; + } + + return 0; +} +
-serge -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>