[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1308570316.8230.140.camel@bahia.local>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 13:45:16 +0200
From: Greg Kurz <gkurz@...ibm.com>
To: Bryan Donlan <bdonlan@...il.com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, containers@...ts.osdl.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, serge@...lyn.com,
daniel.lezcano@...e.fr, ebiederm@...ssion.com, oleg@...hat.com,
xemul@...nvz.org, Cedric Le Goater <clg@...t.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Introduce ActivePid: in /proc/self/status (v2, was
Vpid:)
On Thu, 2011-06-16 at 13:54 -0400, Bryan Donlan wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 10:55, Greg Kurz <gkurz@...ibm.com> wrote:
> > Since pid namespaces were introduced, there's a recurring demand: how one
> > can correlate a pid from a child pid ns with a pid from a parent pid ns ?
> > The need arises in the LXC community when one wants to send a signal from
> > the host (aka. init_pid_ns context) to a container process for which one
> > only knows the pid inside the container.
> >
> > In the future, this should be achievable thanks to Eric Biederman's setns()
> > syscall but there's still some work to be done to support pid namespaces:
> >
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/5/21/162
> >
> > As stated by Serge Hallyn in:
> >
> > http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=27424447
> >
> > "There is nothing that gives you a 100% guaranteed correct race-free
> > correspondence right now. You can look under /proc/<pid>/root/proc/ to
> > see the pids valid in the container, and you can relate output of
> > lxc-ps --forest to ps --forest output. But nothing under /proc that I
> > know of tells you "this task is the same as that task". You can't
> > even look at /proc/<pid> inode numbers since they are different
> > filesystems for each proc mount."
> >
> > This patch adds a single line to /proc/self/status. Provided one has kept
> > track of its container tasks (with a cgroup like liblxc does for example),
> > he may correlate global pids and container pids. This is still racy but
> > definitely easier than what we have today.
>
> Although getting the in-namespace PID is a useful thing, wouldn't a
> truly race-free API be preferable? Any access by PID has the race
> condition in which the target process could die, and its PID get
> recycled between retrieving the PID and doing something with it.
Well the PID is a racy construct when used by another task than the
parent... fortunately, most userland code can cope with it ! :)
> Perhaps a file-descriptor API would be better, such as something like
> this:
>
> int openpid(int id, int flags);
> int rt_sigqueueinfo_fd(int process_fd, int sig, siginfo_t *info);
> int sigqueue_fd(int process_fd, int sig, const union sigval value); //
> glibc wrapper
>
The race still exists: openpid() is being passed a PID... Only the
parent can legitimately know that this PID identifies a specific
unwaited child.
> The opened process FD could be passed across a unix domain socket to a
> process outside the namespace, which could then send signals without
> knowing the in-namespace PID. This same API can be easily extended to
> cover other syscalls which may require PIDs as well.
Indeed, the idea of not exposing a PID from another namespace sounds
nice.
--
Gregory Kurz gkurz@...ibm.com
Software Engineer @ IBM/Meiosys http://www.ibm.com
Tel +33 (0)534 638 479 Fax +33 (0)561 400 420
"Anarchy is about taking complete responsibility for yourself."
Alan Moore.
--
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