Prev: pidns: Call pid_ns_prepare_proc from create_pid_namespace
Next: pidns: Don't allow new pids after the namespace is dead.
From: Oleg Nesterov on 20 Jun 2010 14:40 On 06/20, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > It turns out that the existing assignment in copy_process of > the child_reaper can handle the initial assignment of child_reaper > we just need to generalize the test in kernel/fork.c > > Signed-off-by: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm(a)xmission.com> > --- > init/main.c | 9 --------- > kernel/fork.c | 2 +- > 2 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/init/main.c b/init/main.c > index 3bdb152..38f7edc 100644 > --- a/init/main.c > +++ b/init/main.c > @@ -865,15 +865,6 @@ static int __init kernel_init(void * unused) > * init can run on any cpu. > */ > set_cpus_allowed_ptr(current, cpu_all_mask); > - /* > - * Tell the world that we're going to be the grim > - * reaper of innocent orphaned children. > - * > - * We don't want people to have to make incorrect > - * assumptions about where in the task array this > - * can be found. > - */ > - init_pid_ns.child_reaper = current; > > cad_pid = task_pid(current); > > diff --git a/kernel/fork.c b/kernel/fork.c > index b6cce14..8b85b17 100644 > --- a/kernel/fork.c > +++ b/kernel/fork.c > @@ -1263,7 +1263,7 @@ static struct task_struct *copy_process(unsigned long clone_flags, > tracehook_finish_clone(p, clone_flags, trace); > > if (thread_group_leader(p)) { > - if (clone_flags & CLONE_NEWPID) > + if (pid->numbers[pid->level].nr == 1) > p->nsproxy->pid_ns->child_reaper = p; I must admit, personally I dislike this change. If it is needed for the next changes, please explain the need? Yes, it removes the line from __init function, but it complicates copy_process(), this doesn't look fair to me ;) I agree, the complication is minor, but still. And, in fact, to me this change hides CLONE_NEWPID from grep. In fact, I was looking at this code when I did 1/4. And I think it is better to move it (and perhaps another CLONE_NEWPID check in copy_signal) into copy_pid_ns() path. Oleg. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Oleg Nesterov on 20 Jun 2010 16:30
On 06/20, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > On 06/20, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > > > --- a/kernel/fork.c > > +++ b/kernel/fork.c > > @@ -1263,7 +1263,7 @@ static struct task_struct *copy_process(unsigned long clone_flags, > > tracehook_finish_clone(p, clone_flags, trace); > > > > if (thread_group_leader(p)) { > > - if (clone_flags & CLONE_NEWPID) > > + if (pid->numbers[pid->level].nr == 1) > > p->nsproxy->pid_ns->child_reaper = p; > > I must admit, personally I dislike this change. If it is needed for > the next changes, please explain the need? > > Yes, it removes the line from __init function, but it complicates > copy_process(), this doesn't look fair to me ;) I agree, the complication > is minor, but still. And, in fact, to me this change hides CLONE_NEWPID > from grep. > > In fact, I was looking at this code when I did 1/4. And I think it is > better to move it (and perhaps another CLONE_NEWPID check in copy_signal) > into copy_pid_ns() path. OK, this is needed for 6/6. I still can't say I like this change (and 6/6 too ;), and it is not enough. If we spawn the new init because we called sys_unshare(CLONE_NEWPID) in the past (Eric, imho this can't be the really nice idea) we should also set TASK_UNKILLABLE at least. IOW. Not only this hides CLONE_NEWPID from grep, unshare() also hides it from paths which should know about this flag. I'd rather prefer the straightforward implementation of unshare(NEWPID) which merely adds SIGNAL_THE_NEXT_FORK_SHOULD_USE_CLONE_NEWPID flag to current->signal->flags. Yes, this is very ugly too. Oleg. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ |