[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAPXgP13KeTnBD+hgf_hM55EiQFsYCxmCwyhRaNZ0rUJpjKK=-g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 12:26:30 +0200
From: Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: device-mapper development <dm-devel@...hat.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [dm-devel] clone() with CLONE_NEWNET breaks kobject_uevent_env()
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 11:13, Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com> wrote:
> Milan Broz <mbroz@...hat.com> writes:
>> If you run clone() with CLONE_NEWNET (which is chromium using
>> for sanboxing), udev namespace is cloned too (newly registered
>> in uevent_sock_list) and netlink send (except the first in list)
>> fails with -ESRCH.
>>
>> This causes that _every_ call of kobject_uevent_env() return failure.
> That netlink_ broadcast chooses to treat failure to deliver a packet to
> anyone as an error and return -ESRCH is a little peculiar. In general
> we don't see that error because when you are testing there is at least
> one listener on the netlink socket. So as a practical matter I think
> we should be ignoring return values of -ESRCH from netlink_broadcast,
> in kobject_uevent_env.
Wouldn't a wrap in netlink_has_listeners() help before we try to send it?
Kay
--
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