[Devel] Re: [PATCH 3/7] uts namespaces: use init_utsname when appropriate

Eric W. Biederman ebiederm at xmission.com
Sun Apr 9 02:44:19 PDT 2006


"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue at us.ibm.com> writes:

>> This also probably makes sense as utsname().  It doesn't
>> really matter as this is before init is executed. But logically
>> this is a user space or per namespace action.
>
> Right, I was kind of favoring using init_utsname() for anything
> __init.  But utsname() will of course work just as well there.

Basically anything that should move to klibc I favor using
utsname() for.  That tends to make it clear it follows
the usual user space rules.

With a little luck HPA might actually have this code deleted
in -mm before we get to far.

>> > diff --git a/net/sunrpc/clnt.c b/net/sunrpc/clnt.c
>> > index aa8965e..97c8439 100644
>> > --- a/net/sunrpc/clnt.c
>> > +++ b/net/sunrpc/clnt.c
>> > @@ -176,10 +176,10 @@ rpc_new_client(struct rpc_xprt *xprt, ch
>> >  	}
>> >  
>> >  	/* save the nodename */
>> > -	clnt->cl_nodelen = strlen(system_utsname.nodename);
>> > +	clnt->cl_nodelen = strlen(init_utsname()->nodename);
>> >  	if (clnt->cl_nodelen > UNX_MAXNODENAME)
>> >  		clnt->cl_nodelen = UNX_MAXNODENAME;
>> > -	memcpy(clnt->cl_nodename, system_utsname.nodename, clnt->cl_nodelen);
>> > +	memcpy(clnt->cl_nodename, init_utsname()->nodename, clnt->cl_nodelen);
>> >  	return clnt;
>> >  
>> >  out_no_auth:
>> 
>> Using nodename is practically the definition of something
>> that should per namespace I think.  Plus it would be really inconsistent
>> to use utsname() and the init_utsname for the nfs rpc calls.
>> 
>> Unless I am missing something.
>
> It seemed like this would be happening in any old context, so that
> current->uts_ns could be any process'.  Tracing it back further,
> it seems like nfs+lockd should have the context available.  So I'll
> switch this as well.

I have not traced that path recently.  So I don't remember.
This is one of those odd cases that makes a real difference.

This reminds me of another piece of the conversation.
kernel_thread vs. kthread, and the oddities of daemonize.

In general user space cannot kill kernel threads, so having
a kernel thread inside a namespace is dangerous because it
means the namespace can never exit.

There are two ways to avoid the associated problems.
- modify daemonize to always use the instance of that
  namespace associated with init_task.
- modify all interesting kernel threads to use the
  kthread api instead of kernel_thread.  Using kthread
  makes the kernel threads children of keventd and always
  in the initial namespace instance.  As such we know
  we aren't inside of any user space namespace instance.

Eric




More information about the Devel mailing list