From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kamezawa Hiroyuki Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Make core_pattern support namespace Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 09:57:32 +0900 Message-ID: <56EA00FC.3030800@jp.fujitsu.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: containers-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org Errors-To: containers-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org To: Zhao Lei , linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Mateusz Guzik Cc: containers-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org List-Id: containers.vger.kernel.org On 2016/03/16 18:23, Zhao Lei wrote: > We discussed patch titled: > [PATCH] Make core_pattern support namespace > before. > > Above patch can solve half problem of custom core_dump pattern > in container, but there are also another problem that limit > custom core_pattern in container, it is the pipe-type core_pattern > will write core dump into host's filesystem. > (See discussion of that patch for detail) > > Now we can solve the second problem by [PATCH 1/2], I send > the origional patch with it. > Let me know your design... This patch does using fork+execve() rather than calling UMH in pipe-coredump pass. And coredump-pipe process is run as a child of get-dumped process. Right ? Doesn't this break existing solution actually used in distro ? BTW, it's first time for me to see that _do_fork() is called outside from fork.c. Isn't it better to add a new func in fork.c if we really need this ? Thanks, -Kame