From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1947222Ab3BHWkY (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Feb 2013 17:40:24 -0500 Received: from out03.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.233]:48044 "EHLO out03.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760297Ab3BHWkX (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Feb 2013 17:40:23 -0500 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Clark Williams Cc: Josh Boyer , Andrew Morton , Al Viro , Mel Gorman , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20130207215742.GB31684@hansolo.jdub.homelinux.org> <20130207141502.04625ea0.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20130208003501.GC31684@hansolo.jdub.homelinux.org> <20130208181949.GD31684@hansolo.jdub.homelinux.org> <87k3qiwomi.fsf@xmission.com> <20130208202314.GF31684@hansolo.jdub.homelinux.org> <87r4kqttz8.fsf@xmission.com> <20130208212726.GH31684@hansolo.jdub.homelinux.org> <20130208161031.28212e80@riff.lan> Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2013 14:40:13 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20130208161031.28212e80@riff.lan> (Clark Williams's message of "Fri, 8 Feb 2013 16:10:31 -0600") Message-ID: <874nhmpgz6.fsf@xmission.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-XM-AID: U2FsdGVkX1+ybGcO2AAv2o6/6KnZ8YLZyEQrRo5caEM= X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 98.207.153.68 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com X-Spam-Report: * -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP * 0.0 T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG BODY: T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG * -3.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * -0.0 DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE Not listed in DCC * [sa03 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1] * 0.0 T_XMDrugObfuBody_08 obfuscated drug references X-Spam-DCC: XMission; sa03 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 X-Spam-Combo: ;Clark Williams X-Spam-Relay-Country: Subject: Re: Odd ENOMEM being returned in 3.8-rcX X-Spam-Flag: No X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 14 Nov 2012 14:26:46 -0700) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in02.mta.xmission.com) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Clark Williams writes: > The more I look at that the more I think I should nuke CLONE_NEWPID in > mock. It came in with a commit that added NEWIPC, which I think is valid > for mock managing a chroot, but we're not looking to do full-up > containers at this point and it looks like containers is the only place > you'd want to start a new set of pids. Just taking the code out seems reasonable. Howerver there is a practical use for a pid namespace in a setup like mock. A pid namespace makes it so your sub processes can not reparent and get away from you, which could be handy in case someone starts a system daemon in a post install script. Eric