Re: [REVIEW][PATCH 00/11] ipc: Fixing the pid namespace support

[ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)]

Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> writes:

> On Fri, 23 Mar 2018, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
>>Still I would like to see this fixed and I plan on merging this code.

The code is merged into my for-next tree now.

> Yes, it needs fixed, but 1) there are pending issues (such as the
> extra atomics)

Concerns not issues.  I documented them but I don't see any serious
reason to be concerned.  The data structures are sufficiently different
from AF_UNIX as well as the usage patterns that I have no reasonable
expectation that there will be problems.

There is no reasonable alternate implementation for correcting this bug.
Because of my concerns I looked at several other possibilities and they
all showed incorrect behavior, in different circumstances.

The implementations are simple enough there are no deep subtle issues.

I have tested the code.

If a regression happens the code is carefully split up so things can be
bisected easily and reverted if necessary.

> and 2) its late in the -rc cycle. Plus this issue has existed for 11 years without
> the world ending, so I'm sure we can hold on until at least one more
> release.

People really are starting to seriously look at accessing a single ipc
namespace from multiple pid namespaces.  The work arounds I saw posted
for the current brokenness were too nasty to live.

Better to fix things before there is code that actually starts depending
on the current brokenness.

I am the namespace maintianer and this is my area of responsibility.

The code is ready and I see no reason or benefit in delay.

Eric