Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Wed, 3 Mar 2010 21:26:50 +0100 | From | Oleg Nesterov <> | Subject | [PATCH] pid_ns: zap_pid_ns_processes: use SEND_SIG_NOINFO instead of force_sig() |
| |
zap_pid_ns_processes() uses force_sig(SIGKILL) to ensure SIGKILL will be delivered to sub-namespace inits as well. This is correct, but we are going to change force_sig_info() semantics. See http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15395#c31
We can use send_sig_info(SEND_SIG_NOINFO) instead, since 614c517d7c00af1b26ded20646b329397d6f51a1 SEND_SIG_NOINFO means "from user" and therefore send_signal() will get the correct from_ancestor_ns = T flag.
Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> ---
kernel/pid_namespace.c | 7 +++---- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
--- mm/kernel/pid_namespace.c~NS_DONT_ABUSE_FORCE 2010-02-25 15:22:13.000000000 +0100 +++ mm/kernel/pid_namespace.c 2010-03-03 20:58:12.000000000 +0100 @@ -161,13 +161,12 @@ void zap_pid_ns_processes(struct pid_nam rcu_read_lock(); /* - * Use force_sig() since it clears SIGNAL_UNKILLABLE ensuring - * any nested-container's init processes don't ignore the - * signal + * Any nested-container's init processes won't ignore the + * SEND_SIG_NOINFO signal, see send_signal()->si_fromuser(). */ task = pid_task(find_vpid(nr), PIDTYPE_PID); if (task) - force_sig(SIGKILL, task); + send_sig_info(SIGKILL, SEND_SIG_NOINFO, task); rcu_read_unlock();
| |