Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 23 Mar 2010 07:41:41 +0100 | From | Louis Rilling <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH linux-cr] nested pid namespaces (v2) |
| |
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 12:57:35PM -0700, Matt Helsley wrote: > On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 09:38:00AM -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > > Quoting Louis Rilling (Louis.Rilling@kerlabs.com): > > > On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 04:39:55PM -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > > > > Support checkpoint and restart of tasks in nested pid namespaces. At > > <snip> > > > > It would probably be safer too to use task_active_pid_ns() instead of > > > task->nsproxy->pid_ns, just in case some PID namespace unsharing like proposed > > > by Eric makes it to mainline. > > > > The task is frozen though so it shouldn't be able to unshare while being > > checkpointed, right? But it's probably better code anyway. > > By the time it reaches checkpoint a frozen task is in the refrigerator > -- most often in the signal delivery portion of syscall return. So it can't > be making any new unshare/setns syscalls and any changes to the namespaces > should be visible.
And what about a task having already unshared its pid namespace (from within the container)? In this case, all pid-related stuff should be based on task_active_pid_ns(), and ->nsproxy->pid_ns should be recorded too to correctly restore pid unsharing.
Thanks,
Louis
-- Dr Louis Rilling Kerlabs Skype: louis.rilling Batiment Germanium Phone: (+33|0) 6 80 89 08 23 80 avenue des Buttes de Coesmes http://www.kerlabs.com/ 35700 Rennes [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |