Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:44:13 +0100 | From | Oleg Nesterov <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] fs, proc: Introduce /proc/<pid>/task/<tid>/children entry v6 |
| |
On 01/19, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 04:55:29PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > > Thinking more... I am not sure, but do we really need > > proc_pid_children_iter at all?? > > > > It is very possibly I missed something, but we can get both > > parent_pid and pid_ns from inode, right? so can't we just remember > > inode in seq->private? > > Good point. Letme check if we will need to call for ihold then... > (/me scratchig the head)
Why? file/inode can't go away, at least until this fd is closed.
And just in case, get_pid(proc_pid(inode)) is not needed, even in v6/v7. I didn't realize this.
Cyrill, I won't argue if you prefer to make this in a separate patch (of course, assuming you are agree) on top of v7, to me it looks "good enough".
Oleg.
| |