[Devel] Re: Q: How complete is the pid namespace in mainline
Eric W. Biederman
ebiederm at xmission.com
Fri Oct 26 02:33:25 PDT 2007
Cedric Le Goater <clg at fr.ibm.com> writes:
> Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> Guys how complete do you fee the pid namespace support is that
>> has been merged into Linus's tree?
>>
>> My impression until I started reading through code earlier today
>> was that the support was just about done except for a couple of
>> tricky details.
>
> Yes It looks sane.
>
> Here's what I have in mind :
>
> * there are some patches from suka that make sure the pid namespace init
> is not getting abusively killed by one of this children
> * the pid cleanup is not complete
> . locks
> . kthread (i should work soon on improving kthread to support
> signals)
>
> IMO, the proc mount shouldn't be under the pid namespace. we will
> need that sooner or later.
I was hoping to get a larger list of unfixed issues.
Currently from my review I have generated about 25 bugfix patches.
Several of them in some fairly obvious places.
I think it is a good base to build on, but it feels to like we still
have a significant ways to go.
I think the assumption that we can use global pid numbers instead
of instead of struct pids is racy, and a serious maintenance problem.
It leads to silent breakage of routines like get_net_ns_by_pid,
and possibly a couple of other places.
I'm really not happy with pid_nr meaning a pid number in the
init_pid_ns and pid_vnr meaning a pid number meaning a pid in the
local pid namespace. But that is just a matter of names so I
don't think it has caused any problems. Short of making it
to easy to get a pid number in the &init_pid_ns.
Eric
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers at lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
More information about the Devel
mailing list