[Devel] Re: [PATCH 5/5] pid: use namespaced iteration on processes while managing priority
Matt Helsley
matthltc at us.ibm.com
Thu Dec 18 20:37:08 PST 2008
On Thu, 2008-12-18 at 20:30 -0800, Matt Helsley wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-12-18 at 10:54 -0800, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> > "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue at us.ibm.com> writes:
> >
> >
> > > The uid check needs to be fixed for user namespaces, agreed. I could
> > > go either way though on whether we should also restrict to the same
> > > pidns.
> >
> > It would be a subtle unexpected semantic change, that we would need
> > to copy linux-abi and document etc. I'm not convinced it is that
> > useful.
> >
> > I'm inclined to keep the semantics pure until there is some real
> > experience from the field on issues like this.
>
> Well the man page talks about PRIO_PROCESS and PRIO_PGRP and in those
> cases it looks like "who" is really a pid or pgrp id:
>
> > The value which is one of PRIO_PROCESS, PRIO_PGRP, or PRIO_USER, and
> > who is interpreted relative to which (a process identifier for
> > PRIO_PROCESS, process group identifier for PRIO_PGRP, and a user ID for
> > PRIO_USER).
>
> It looks to me like restricting by pidns is required if "which" is
> PRIO_PROCESS or PRIO_PGRP. If "which" is PRIO_USER then yes, it sounds
> like a user ns issue.
Eh, ignore me. Looks like this is already the case in the code.
> Cheers,
> -Matt Helsley
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers at lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
More information about the Devel
mailing list