From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu Subject: Re: Signals to cinit Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 10:12:11 -0800 Message-ID: <20081112181211.GC3230@us.ibm.com> References: <20081101180505.GA24268@us.ibm.com> <20081110173839.GA11121@redhat.com> <20081110193228.GA15519@redhat.com> <20081110232735.GA20891@us.ibm.com> <20081112145226.GA13269@redhat.com> <20081112164915.GB14572@us.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081112164915.GB14572@us.ibm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Serge E. Hallyn" Cc: Oleg Nesterov , "Eric W. Biederman" , Pavel Emelyanov , daniel@hozac.com, Nadia Derbey , clg@fr.ibm.com, Containers , sukadev@us.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: containers.vger.kernel.org Serge E. Hallyn [serue@us.ibm.com] wrote: | Quoting Oleg Nesterov (oleg@redhat.com): | > > | Perhaps we can start with something like the patch below. Not that I like | > > | it very much though. We should really place this code under | > > | CONFIG_I_DO_CARE_ABOUT_NAMESPACES ;) | > > | > > CONFIG_PID_NS ? | > | > Ah yes, we have it ;) | | Except I believe all distros at this point enable CONFIG_PID_NS, so | I'm not sure it's the right thing to use. But if they do enable CONFIG_PID_NS they would want the signals to behave correctly ? IIUC, the reason we want to the hide the code is that it is not clean i.e if its not experimental or error-prone, are there other reasons someone with CONFIG_PID_NS=y want to hide it ?