Richard Weinberger writes:
> Am 04.08.2014 18:46, schrieb Eric W. Biederman:
>> Richard Weinberger writes:
>>
>>> On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 12:09 AM, Eric W. Biederman
>>> wrote:
[snip]
>>
>> Hmm. That problem does sound familiar.
>>
>> Is the problem oversharing? Is the problem that the moun
Am 05.08.2014 00:10, schrieb Ram Pai:
> On Mon, Aug 04, 2014 at 11:19:35PM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>> Am 04.08.2014 18:46, schrieb Eric W. Biederman:
>>> Richard Weinberger writes:
>>
>> /proc is propagating into another mount namespaces that does not care.
>> This happens because systemd
On Mon, Aug 04, 2014 at 11:19:35PM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Am 04.08.2014 18:46, schrieb Eric W. Biederman:
> > Richard Weinberger writes:
>
> /proc is propagating into another mount namespaces that does not care.
> This happens because systemd creates for several services a mount names
Am 04.08.2014 18:46, schrieb Eric W. Biederman:
> Richard Weinberger writes:
>
>> On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 12:09 AM, Eric W. Biederman
>> wrote:
>>> Richard Weinberger writes:
>>>
Am 01.08.2014 17:44, schrieb Ram Pai:
> On Fri, Aug 01, 2014 at 12:17:13AM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
Richard Weinberger writes:
> On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 12:09 AM, Eric W. Biederman
> wrote:
>> Richard Weinberger writes:
>>
>>> Am 01.08.2014 17:44, schrieb Ram Pai:
On Fri, Aug 01, 2014 at 12:17:13AM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Am 30.07.2014 22:46, schrieb Richard Weinberger:
>>>
On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 12:09 AM, Eric W. Biederman
wrote:
> Richard Weinberger writes:
>
>> Am 01.08.2014 17:44, schrieb Ram Pai:
>>> On Fri, Aug 01, 2014 at 12:17:13AM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
Am 30.07.2014 22:46, schrieb Richard Weinberger:
> Am 30.07.2014 15:59, schrieb Richar
Richard Weinberger writes:
> Am 01.08.2014 17:44, schrieb Ram Pai:
>> On Fri, Aug 01, 2014 at 12:17:13AM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>>> Am 30.07.2014 22:46, schrieb Richard Weinberger:
Am 30.07.2014 15:59, schrieb Richard Weinberger:
> If we use the plain list_empty() we might not
Am 01.08.2014 17:44, schrieb Ram Pai:
> On Fri, Aug 01, 2014 at 12:17:13AM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>> Am 30.07.2014 22:46, schrieb Richard Weinberger:
>>> Am 30.07.2014 15:59, schrieb Richard Weinberger:
If we use the plain list_empty() we might not see the
hlist_del_init_rcu() a
On Fri, Aug 01, 2014 at 12:17:13AM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Am 30.07.2014 22:46, schrieb Richard Weinberger:
> > Am 30.07.2014 15:59, schrieb Richard Weinberger:
> >> If we use the plain list_empty() we might not see the
> >> hlist_del_init_rcu() and therefore miss one member of the
> >>
Am 30.07.2014 22:46, schrieb Richard Weinberger:
> Am 30.07.2014 15:59, schrieb Richard Weinberger:
>> If we use the plain list_empty() we might not see the
>> hlist_del_init_rcu() and therefore miss one member of the
>> list.
>>
>> It fixes the following issue:
>> $ unshare -m /usr/bin/sleep 1
Am 30.07.2014 15:59, schrieb Richard Weinberger:
> If we use the plain list_empty() we might not see the
> hlist_del_init_rcu() and therefore miss one member of the
> list.
>
> It fixes the following issue:
> $ unshare -m /usr/bin/sleep 1 &
> $ mkdir -p foo/proc
> $ mount -t proc none foo/proc
11 matches
Mail list logo