On 11/06, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> --- a/kernel/fork.c
> +++ b/kernel/fork.c
> @@ -1174,7 +1174,7 @@ static struct task_struct *copy_process(unsigned long
> clone_flags,
> * do not allow it to share a thread group or signal handlers or
> * parent with the forking task.
>
Hi there,
> Having used bash as an init process I know it can handle unexpeted
> children. However using CLONE_PARENT in this way still seems a little
> dodgy. Or am I misunderstanding why you are using CLONE_PARENT?
Since I (re)wrote that part of LXC, I should perhaps clarify how that is
used:
Quoting Andy Lutomirski (l...@amacapital.net):
> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Eric W. Biederman
> wrote:
> > Oleg Nesterov writes:
> >
> >> Hi Serge,
> >>
> >> On 11/06, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi Oleg,
> >>>
> >>> commit 40a0d32d1eaffe6aac7324ca92604b6b3977eb0e :
> >>> "fork: unify a
Quoting Eric W. Biederman (ebied...@xmission.com):
> Oleg Nesterov writes:
>
> > Hi Serge,
> >
> > On 11/06, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Oleg,
> >>
> >> commit 40a0d32d1eaffe6aac7324ca92604b6b3977eb0e :
> >> "fork: unify and tighten up CLONE_NEWUSER/CLONE_NEWPID checks"
> >> breaks lxc-attac
Serge Hallyn writes:
> So apart from peers seeing the new task as having pid 0, and
> sigchild going to the grandparent, are there any other side
> effects? Is ptrace an issue? (I took a quick look but it
> doesn't seem like it)
There is nothing new the pid namespace adds to the pid namespace
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Oleg Nesterov writes:
>
>> Hi Serge,
>>
>> On 11/06, Serge Hallyn wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Oleg,
>>>
>>> commit 40a0d32d1eaffe6aac7324ca92604b6b3977eb0e :
>>> "fork: unify and tighten up CLONE_NEWUSER/CLONE_NEWPID checks"
>>> breaks lxc-attach i
Oleg Nesterov writes:
> Hi Serge,
>
> On 11/06, Serge Hallyn wrote:
>>
>> Hi Oleg,
>>
>> commit 40a0d32d1eaffe6aac7324ca92604b6b3977eb0e :
>> "fork: unify and tighten up CLONE_NEWUSER/CLONE_NEWPID checks"
>> breaks lxc-attach in 3.12. That code forks a child which does
>> setns() and then does a
Quoting Oleg Nesterov (o...@redhat.com):
> Hi Serge,
>
> On 11/06, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> >
> > Hi Oleg,
> >
> > commit 40a0d32d1eaffe6aac7324ca92604b6b3977eb0e :
> > "fork: unify and tighten up CLONE_NEWUSER/CLONE_NEWPID checks"
> > breaks lxc-attach in 3.12. That code forks a child which does
>
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 12:06 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 11/06, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>> > Hi Serge,
>> >
>> > On 11/06, Serge Hallyn wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi Oleg,
>> >>
>> >> commit 40a0d32d1eaffe6aac7324ca92604b6b3977eb0e :
>> >> "for
On 11/06, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > Hi Serge,
> >
> > On 11/06, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Oleg,
> >>
> >> commit 40a0d32d1eaffe6aac7324ca92604b6b3977eb0e :
> >> "fork: unify and tighten up CLONE_NEWUSER/CLONE_NEWPID checks"
> >> bre
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Hi Serge,
>
> On 11/06, Serge Hallyn wrote:
>>
>> Hi Oleg,
>>
>> commit 40a0d32d1eaffe6aac7324ca92604b6b3977eb0e :
>> "fork: unify and tighten up CLONE_NEWUSER/CLONE_NEWPID checks"
>> breaks lxc-attach in 3.12. That code forks a child which
Hi Serge,
On 11/06, Serge Hallyn wrote:
>
> Hi Oleg,
>
> commit 40a0d32d1eaffe6aac7324ca92604b6b3977eb0e :
> "fork: unify and tighten up CLONE_NEWUSER/CLONE_NEWPID checks"
> breaks lxc-attach in 3.12. That code forks a child which does
> setns() and then does a clone(CLONE_PARENT). That way the
Hi Oleg,
commit 40a0d32d1eaffe6aac7324ca92604b6b3977eb0e :
"fork: unify and tighten up CLONE_NEWUSER/CLONE_NEWPID checks"
breaks lxc-attach in 3.12. That code forks a child which does
setns() and then does a clone(CLONE_PARENT). That way the
grandchild can be in the right namespaces (which the c
13 matches
Mail list logo
