From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@free.fr>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xemul@openvz.org,
sukadev@us.ibm.com, ebiederm@xmission.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] pidns: Don't allow new pids after the namespace is dead.
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 21:54:58 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110217205458.GB16076@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4D5C5BE8.5020803@free.fr>
On 02/17, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>
> On 02/15/2011 07:30 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>> On 02/15, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>>> In the case of unsharing or joining a pid namespace, it becomes
>>> possible to attempt to allocate a pid after zap_pid_namespace has
>>> killed everything in the namespace. Close the hole for now by simply
>>> not allowing any of those pid allocations to succeed.
>> Daniel, please explain more. It seems, a long ago I knew the reason
>> for this patch, but now I can't recall and can't understand this change.
>
> The idea behind unsharing the pid namespace is the current pid is not
> mapped in the newly created pid namespace and appears as the pid 0.
Well, not exactly afaics... but doesn't matter.
> When
> it forks, the child process becomes the init pid of the new pid
> namespace.
Yes, I see. And this is what I personally dislike. Because, iow,
unshare(PID) changes current->nspory->pid_ns to affect the behaviour
of copy_process() , this really looks like "action at a distance" to
me. Too subtle and fragile. But, once again, this is just imho, feel
free to ignore.
> When this pid namespace dies because the init pid exited, the
> parent process (aka pid 0) can no longer fork because the pid namespace
> is flagged dead. This is what does this patch.
OK, thanks. I seem to understand. May be ;)
I'd suggest you to add this explanation to the changelog.
>>> --- a/include/linux/pid_namespace.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/pid_namespace.h
>>> @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ struct pid_namespace {
>>> struct kref kref;
>>> struct pidmap pidmap[PIDMAP_ENTRIES];
>>> int last_pid;
>>> + atomic_t dead;
>> Why atomic_t? It is used as a plain boolean.
>>
>> And I can't unde
>
> I think Eric used an atomic because it is lockless with alloc_pid vs
> zap_pid_ns_processes.
Can't understand...
But anyway, I strongly believe atomic_t buys nothing in this patch.
May be it is needed for the next changes, I dunno.
Oleg.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-02-17 21:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-02-15 16:53 [PATCH 1/2] pidns: Don't allow new pids after the namespace is dead Daniel Lezcano
2011-02-15 16:53 ` [PATCH 2/2] pidns: Support unsharing the pid namespace Daniel Lezcano
2011-02-15 19:01 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-02-15 19:15 ` [PATCH 0/1] Was: " Oleg Nesterov
2011-02-15 19:17 ` [PATCH 1/1][3rd resend] sys_unshare: remove the dead CLONE_THREAD/SIGHAND/VM code Oleg Nesterov
2011-02-21 0:17 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2011-02-16 23:47 ` [PATCH 2/2] pidns: Support unsharing the pid namespace Daniel Lezcano
2011-02-17 20:29 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-02-17 22:35 ` Greg Kurz
2011-02-18 14:40 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-02-24 1:12 ` Rob Landley
2011-02-15 18:30 ` [PATCH 1/2] pidns: Don't allow new pids after the namespace is dead Oleg Nesterov
2011-02-16 23:21 ` Daniel Lezcano
2011-02-17 20:54 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20110217205458.GB16076@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=containers@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@free.fr \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sukadev@us.ibm.com \
--cc=xemul@openvz.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox