OpenVZ Forum - RDF feed
type: channel
items: unshare() pid ns
items: Re: unshare() pid ns

unshare() pid ns
type: item
description: Pavel, unshare() of pid ns seems to fail with -EINVAL in 2.6.23-rc3-mm1. I thought we supported it in the earlier patchsets. I guess I missed that in the review of recent patchsets. Did we remove/disable it on purpose ? I am not particular that we support it though. Just want to make sure. Suka _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
creator: Sukadev Bhattiprolu
date: 2007-08-30T05:29:28-00:00

Re: unshare() pid ns
type: item
description: sukadev@us.ibm.com wrote: > Pavel, > > unshare() of pid ns seems to fail with -EINVAL in 2.6.23-rc3-mm1. > I thought we supported it in the earlier patchsets. I guess > I missed that in the review of recent patchsets. I disabled unsharing of pid namespaces because it's almost impossible. Look - you have to reattach all the pids to the task with saving its ids as seen in previous namespaces. > Did we remove/disable it on purpose ? I am not particular that we > support it though. Just want to make sure. > > Suka > _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
creator: Pavel Emelianov
date: 2007-08-30T08:10:51-00:00

Re: unshare() pid ns
type: item
description: Quoting Pavel Emelyanov (xemul@openvz.org): > sukadev@us.ibm.com wrote: >> Pavel, >> unshare() of pid ns seems to fail with -EINVAL in 2.6.23-rc3-mm1. >> I thought we supported it in the earlier patchsets. I guess >> I missed that in the review of recent patchsets. > > I disabled unsharing of pid namespaces because it's almost > impossible. Look - you have to reattach all the pids to the > task with saving its ids as seen in previous namespaces. We agree, but thought you for some perverse reason preferred unshare to clone for pidns :) Thanks for clarifying. -serge _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
creator: serue
date: 2007-08-30T13:34:22-00:00

Re: unshare() pid ns
type: item
description: Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > Quoting Pavel Emelyanov (xemul@openvz.org): >> sukadev@us.ibm.com wrote: >>> Pavel, >>> unshare() of pid ns seems to fail with -EINVAL in 2.6.23-rc3-mm1. >>> I thought we supported it in the earlier patchsets. I guess >>> I missed that in the review of recent patchsets. >> I disabled unsharing of pid namespaces because it's almost >> impossible. Look - you have to reattach all the pids to the >> task with saving its ids as seen in previous namespaces. > > We agree, but thought you for some perverse reason preferred unshare to > clone for pidns :) I did that in my first version of patches, but then realized that such problem (the need in reattaching pids) makes the unsharing ugly. BTW, unsharing of a pid namespace is a valid operation, so I think I will enable it in the nearest future. I have some thought on how to make such a reattach ;) > Thanks for clarifying. > > -serge > _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
creator: Pavel Emelianov
date: 2007-08-30T14:11:27-00:00

Re: unshare() pid ns
type: item
description: Pavel Emelianov [xemul@openvz.org] wrote: | sukadev@us.ibm.com wrote: | >Pavel, | > | >unshare() of pid ns seems to fail with -EINVAL in 2.6.23-rc3-mm1. | >I thought we supported it in the earlier patchsets. I guess | >I missed that in the review of recent patchsets. | | I disabled unsharing of pid namespaces because it's almost | impossible. Look - you have to reattach all the pids to the | task with saving its ids as seen in previous namespaces. Agree. Eric pointed that out early on. | | >Did we remove/disable it on purpose ? I am not particular that we | >support it though. Just want to make sure. | > | >Suka | > _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
creator: Sukadev Bhattiprolu
date: 2007-08-30T14:19:40-00:00

Re: unshare() pid ns
type: item
description: Quoting Pavel Emelyanov (xemul@openvz.org): > Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > > Quoting Pavel Emelyanov (xemul@openvz.org): > >> sukadev@us.ibm.com wrote: > >>> Pavel, > >>> unshare() of pid ns seems to fail with -EINVAL in 2.6.23-rc3-mm1. > >>> I thought we supported it in the earlier patchsets. I guess > >>> I missed that in the review of recent patchsets. > >> I disabled unsharing of pid namespaces because it's almost > >> impossible. Look - you have to reattach all the pids to the > >> task with saving its ids as seen in previous namespaces. > > > > We agree, but thought you for some perverse reason preferred unshare to > > clone for pidns :) > > I did that in my first version of patches, but then realized > that such problem (the need in reattaching pids) makes the > unsharing ugly. > > BTW, unsharing of a pid namespace is a valid operation, so I > think I will enable it in the nearest future. I have some > thought on how to make such a reattach ;) Alrighty :) Of course it's not just the kernel ugliness, but also the userspace ugliness, for instance the rumored (I haven't looked to confirm) caching of pids by glibc. But in the end if we can achieve symmetry between all the CLONE_NEW* flags all the better. -serge _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
creator: serue
date: 2007-08-30T14:35:18-00:00

Re: unshare() pid ns
type: item
description: Hello Pavel ! Pavel Emelyanov wrote: > Serge E. Hallyn wrote: >> Quoting Pavel Emelyanov (xemul@openvz.org): >>> sukadev@us.ibm.com wrote: >>>> Pavel, >>>> unshare() of pid ns seems to fail with -EINVAL in 2.6.23-rc3-mm1. >>>> I thought we supported it in the earlier patchsets. I guess >>>> I missed that in the review of recent patchsets. >>> I disabled unsharing of pid namespaces because it's almost >>> impossible. Look - you have to reattach all the pids to the >>> task with saving its ids as seen in previous namespaces. >> We agree, but thought you for some perverse reason preferred unshare to >> clone for pidns :) > > I did that in my first version of patches, but then realized > that such problem (the need in reattaching pids) makes the > unsharing ugly. > > BTW, unsharing of a pid namespace is a valid operation, so I > think I will enable it in the nearest future. I have some > thought on how to make such a reattach ;) that would be also very useful to 'enter' such a namespace. BTW, did you take a look at the sys_hijack() serge sent ? Thanks, C. _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
creator: Cedric Le Goater
date: 2007-08-30T16:34:29-00:00