OpenVZ Forum


Home » Mailing lists » Devel » [RFC][PATCH] Do not set /proc inode->pid for non-pid-related inodes
Re: [RFC][PATCH] Do not set /proc inode->pid for non-pid-related inodes [message #17980 is a reply to message #17958] Thu, 22 March 2007 13:14 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Cedric Le Goater is currently offline  Cedric Le Goater
Messages: 443
Registered: February 2006
Senior Member
>> So I suggested to have a kthread be pid == 1 for each new pid namespace. 
>> the kthread can do the killing of all tasks if needed and will die when
>> the refcount on the pid namespace == 0.
>>
>> Would such a (rough) design be acceptable for mainline ?
> 
> The case that preserves existing semantics requires us to be able to
> run /sbin/init in a container.  Therefore pid 1 should be a user space
> process.

/sbin/init can't run without being pid == 1. hmm ? need to check. When we
have more of the pid namespace, it should be easier.
 
> So I don't think a design that doesn't allow us to run /sbin/init as
> in a container would be acceptable for mainline.

I agree that user space is assuming that /sbin/init has pid == 1 but don't 
you think that's a strong assumption ? 

on the kernel side we have is_init() so it shouldn't be an issue.

C.
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
 
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: Re: Linux-VServer example results for sharing vs. separate mappings ...
Next Topic: [PATCH] Correct accept(2) recovery after sock_attach_fd()
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Fri Sep 05 08:46:37 GMT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.09047 seconds