[lkml]   [2009]   [Jan]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/7][v7] Container-init signal semantics
On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 12:26:38 -0800
Sukadev Bhattiprolu <> wrote:

> Container-init must behave like global-init to processes within the
> container and hence it must be immune to unhandled fatal signals from
> within the container (i.e SIG_DFL signals that terminate the process).
> But the same container-init must behave like a normal process to
> processes in ancestor namespaces and so if it receives the same fatal
> signal from a process in ancestor namespace, the signal must be
> processed.
> Implementing these semantics requires that send_signal() determine pid
> namespace of the sender but since signals can originate from workqueues/
> interrupt-handlers, determining pid namespace of sender may not always
> be possible or safe.

Is this feature is for blocking signals from children to name-space
creator(owner) ? And automatically used when namespace/cgroup is created ?
IOW, Container-init is Namespace-Cgroup-init ?

I'm glad if you add some documentation updates about how-it-works to patch set.


 \ /
  Last update: 2009-01-19 03:13    [W:0.285 / U:2.000 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site