Re: [patch] PID namespace design bug, workaround

[sukadev@us.ibm.com]

Pavel Emelianov [xemul@openvz.org] wrote:
| Ulrich Drepper wrote:
| > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
| > Hash: SHA1
| > 
| > Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
| >>> Isn't it this?
| >>>
| >>> http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/11/1/141
| >> That was the initial problem, and I already answered to Ingo about
| >> it
| > 
| > No, look at my old mail which Ingo referenced in that posting.
| 
| You pointed only one problem that is not a variation of "how do 
| we handle the case when we pass our pid outside the namespace".
| 
| This problem with signals is now being resolved at IBM by Sukadev 
| and Serge (I put them in Cc), so this is about to be fixed by the
| time 2.6.24 releases (I hope).

Yes. We (Oleg, Eric included in Cc) have a patchset to address signals
issues in child pid namespaces. It is being discussed on Containers list:

https://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/containers/2007-October/008240.html

We will post the patchset to LKML soon.

| 
| As far as the "passing the pid outside the namespace" is concerned, 
| is my answer "pids should never be used outside the namespace they
| came from, otherwise userspace won't work as expected" satisfactory?
| 
| So is "everything else", you mentioned, covered with the problems
| above?
| 
| > - --
| > ➧ Ulrich Drepper ➧ Red Hat, Inc. ➧ 444 Castro St ➧ Mountain View, CA ❖
| > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
| > Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
| > 
| > iD8DBQFHKy692ijCOnn/RHQRAtYLAJ98EXTGl3HMlCbVXOkL7TJRFfw4DACfcgYI
| > HHz5f7TfM05Dps+ruPRiUrU=
| > =IjS4
| > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
| >