Re: [PATCH 2/4] signals: send_signal: use si_fromuser() to detect from_ancestor_ns

[Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>]

Oleg Nesterov [oleg-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org] wrote:
| On 10/05, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
| >
| > Oleg Nesterov [oleg-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org] wrote:
| > | Sorry for confusion.
| > |
| > | > But sure, we could use force_sig_info() in caller.
| > |
| > | Yes, because this makes the code more explicit imho. And we can avoid
| > | the further complicatiions in send_signal() path.
| >
| > Although, one small drawback would be the different behavior for the
| > SIGKILL in load_aout_binary() to the container-init itself calling:
| >
| > 	kill(getpid(), SIGKILL);
| 
| could you clarify? load_aout_binary(), like other ->load_binary()
| methods does send_sig(SIGKILL, current, 0) ?

Yes sorry for being cryptic.

If we use force_sig_info() in ->load_binary() methods for the SIGKILL,
they will, correctly, kill the container-init.

But if the container-init itself calls kill(getpid(), SIGKILL), the
container-init will not be killed.

I was just pointing out the small difference in behavior for the
same signal (when we use force_sig_info()).

Thanks for fixing the bug.

Sukadev