[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130322002030.GI21522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2013 00:20:31 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Subject: Re: VFS deadlock ?
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 12:12:57AM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> See the posting upthread. We could try to kludge around that as well
> (e.g. have d_ancestor() compare ->d_inode instead of dentries themselves),
> but I really think it's a lousy idea only inviting further abuse.
>
> What we should do, IMO, is to turn /proc/<pid>/net into a honest symlink -
> to ../nets/<netns ID>/net. Hell, might even make it a magical symlink
> instead...
BTW, the root cause is that what used to be /proc/net became per-process.
So Eric (IIRC) had added /proc/<pid>/net. Only they are not really per-process
- they are per-netns. And instead of putting those per-ns trees elsewhere and
having /proc/<pid>/net resolve to the right one, we got them as directories,
with each entry hardlinked between all /proc/<pid>/net for processes from
the same netns. Including the subdirectory ones. Oops...
Another variant is to keep cross-hardlinks for non-directories and duplicate
directory dentries/inodes as we do for /proc/<pid>/net themselves.
--
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