[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091023192124.GA11088@us.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 12:21:24 -0700
From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: Matt Helsley <matthltc@...ibm.com>,
Oren Laadan <orenl@...rato.com>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...e.fr>,
randy.dunlap@...cle.com, arnd@...db.de, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
Containers <containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Nathan Lynch <nathanl@...tin.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Louis.Rilling@...labs.com,
kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, hpa@...or.com, mingo@...e.hu,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>, roland@...hat.com,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][v8][PATCH 0/10] Implement clone3() system call
Eric W. Biederman [ebiederm@...ssion.com] wrote:
| > Anyway, is RESERVED_PIDS meant for initial kernel-threads/daemons - if so
| > would it be ok enforce it only in init_pid_ns ?
|
| It is mean for initial user space daemons, things that start on boot.
|
| I don't know how much the protection matters at this date, but we have it.
Well, since it is not security or other critical restriction, can we allow
set_pidmap() a free hand - even in init-pid-ns ? It could prevent a simple
subtree C/R of one of the early daemons for debug for instance.
Sukadev
--
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