[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090119110906.58ccbcbd.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 11:09:06 +0900
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: oleg@...hat.com, ebiederm@...ssion.com, roland@...hat.com,
bastian@...di.eu.org, daniel@...ac.com, xemul@...nvz.org,
containers@...ts.osdl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7][v7] Container-init signal semantics
On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 12:26:38 -0800
Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> 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.
Thanks,
-Kame
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists