Re: [PATCH 5/6][cr-test][v2]: eclone-5: nr_pids must not exceed nesting level

["Serge E. Hallyn" <serue-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>]

Quoting Sukadev Bhattiprolu (sukadev-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org):
> Serge E. Hallyn [serue-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org] wrote:
> | Quoting Sukadev Bhattiprolu (sukadev-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org):
> | > 
> | > From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>
> | > Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2010 18:13:51 -0800
> | > Subject: [PATCH 5/6] eclone-5: nr_pids must not exceed nesting level
> | > 
> | > Verify that eclone() fails if nr_pids exceeds the current nesting level
> | > of pid namespaces. Also verify that eclone() succeeds in choosing a pid
> | > for a process in a descendant pid namespace.
> | 
> | This is a bit of a shame - it failed for me at first because I was
> | running it inside a container.  But there is no way for a task to
> | know it's own nsdepth right?
> 
> Nope - or at least I don't know of any way.
> 
> We could modify the test to set nr_pids to a ridiculously large value
> just to test that eclone() fails when nr_pids exceeds nesting level.

Yeah though it's nice to be able to test the boundary conditions.

I suppose it could take an optional nesting level argument - if not
specified use 20.  Then in documentation recommend that people run

	eclone-5 2

from init_pid_ns.  The motivation would be to have the automated testing
not return false positives!

> | So I went ahead and pushed these tests (plus a few changes).
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Sukadev