lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Sep]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH RFC v3 2/2] pidns: introduce syscall getvpid
Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@yandex-team.ru> writes:

> If pid is negative then getvpid() returns pid of parent task for -pid.

Now that I am noticing this. I don't think I have seen any discussion
about justifying a syscall getting another processes parent pid. My
apologies if I just missed it.

Why do we want the the parent pid? We can we usefully do with it?
Is proc really that bad of an interface?

Fetching a parent pid feels like a separate logical operation
from pid translation. Which makes me a bit uneasy about this
part of the conversation.

> Examples:
> getvpid(pid, ns, -1) - get pid in our pid namespace
> getvpid(pid, -1, ns) - get pid in container
> getvpid(pid, -1, ns) > 0 - is pid is reachable from container?
> getvpid(1, ns1, ns2) > 0 - is ns1 inside ns2?
> getvpid(1, ns1, ns2) == 0 - is ns1 outside ns2?
> getvpid(1, ns, -1) - get init task of pid-namespace
> getvpid(-1, ns, -1) - get reaper of init task in parent pid-namespace
> getvpid(-pid, -1, -1) - get ppid by pid

As I step back and pay attention to this case I am half wondering if
perhaps what would be most useful is a file descriptor that refers
to a pid and an updated set of system calls that takes pid file
descriptors instead of pids.

Something like:

getpidfd(int pidnsfd, pid_t pid);

waitfd(int pidfd, int *status, int options, struct rusage *rusage);

killfd(int pidfd, int sig);

clonefd(...);

And perhaps:
pid_nr_ns(int pidnsfd, int pidfd);

parentfd(int pidfd);

Eric


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-09-28 19:21    [W:2.316 / U:0.008 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site