[Devel] Re: How much of a mess does OpenVZ make? ; ) Was: What can OpenVZ do?

[Cedric Le Goater]

> No, what you're suggesting does not suffice.

probably. I'm still trying to understand what you mean below :)

Man, I hate these hierarchicals pid_ns. one level would have been enough, 
just one vpid attribute in 'struct pid*'
 
> Call
> (5591,3,1) the task knows as 5591 in the init_pid_ns, 3 in a child pid
> ns, and 1 in grandchild pid_ns created from there.  Now assume we are
> checkpointing tasks T1=(5592,1), and T2=(5594,3,1).
> 
> We don't care about the first number in the tuples, so they will be
> random numbers after the recreate. 

yes.

> But we do care about the second numbers.  

yes very much and we need a way set these numbers in alloc_pid()

> But specifying CLONE_NEWPID while recreating the process tree
> in userspace does not allow you to specify the 3 in (5594,3,1).

I haven't looked closely at hierarchical pid namespaces but as we're
using a an array of pid indexed but the pidns level, i don't see why 
it shouldn't be possible. you might be right.

anyway, I think that some CLONE_NEW* should be forbidden. Daniel should
send soon a little patch for the ns_cgroup restricting the clone flags
being used in a container.

Cheers,

C.

> Or are you suggesting that you'll do a dummy clone of (5594,2) so that
> the next clone(CLONE_NEWPID) will be expected to be (5594,3,1)?
> 
> -serge

_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers at lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers