OpenVZ Forum


Home » Mailing lists » Devel » [PATCH 0/13] Pid namespaces (OpenVZ view)
Re: [PATCH 11/13] Changes to show virtual ids to user [message #13635 is a reply to message #13634] Thu, 31 May 2007 11:46 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Pavel Emelianov is currently offline  Pavel Emelianov
Messages: 1149
Registered: September 2006
Senior Member
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Pavel Emelianov <xemul@openvz.org> writes:
>
>> Pavel Emelianov wrote:
>>> Cedric Le Goater wrote:
>>>> Hello !
>>>>
>>>>>>> The worst case I can see with pid == 0. Is that it would be a bug
>>>>>>> that we can fix later. For other cases it would seem to be a user
>>>>>>> space API thing that we get stuck with for all time.
>>>>>> We cannot trust userspace application to expect some pid other than
>>>>>> positive. All that we can is either use some always-absent pid or
>>>>>> send the signal as SI_KERNEL.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Our experience show that making decisions like above causes random
>>>> <>> applications failures that are hard (or even impossible) to debug.
>>>>
>>>>> Ok. So I guess I see what you are proposing is picking an arbitrary
>>>>> pid, say pid == 2, and reserving that in all pid namespaces and using
>>>>> it when we have a pid that does not map to a specific namespace. I'm
>>>>> fine with that.
>>>>>
>>>>> All I care about is that we have a solution, preferably simple,
>>>>> to the non-mapped pid problem.
>>>> Pavel, are you against using pid == 0 and setting si_code to SI_KERNEL ?
>>> I think I am. A quick grep through the code revealed one place where
>> Sorry. I have misprinted. I meant "I think I am *NOT*". My bad :(
>>
>>> this can happen, so I believe application are (have to be) somehow
>>> prepared to this.
>
> Where was this. I'd like to follow your complete line of thinking.

The line concerning why I think that sending a signal from
SI_KERNEL is good solution?

> Eric
>
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC] [PATCH 0/3] Add group fairness to CFS
Next Topic: [RFC][PATCH 0/16] Enable cloning of pid namespace
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Thu Jul 31 09:03:48 GMT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.33486 seconds