[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130908170001.GA1835@redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2013 19:00:01 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: Linux Containers <containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [REVIEW][PATCH 3/5] pidns: Don't have unshare(CLONE_NEWPID)
imply CLONE_THREAD
Sorry for delay, vacation.
On 08/29, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> I goofed when I made unshare(CLONE_NEWPID) only work in a
> single-threaded process. There is no need for that requirement and in
> fact I analyzied things right for setns. The hard requirement
> is for tasks that share a VM to all be in the pid namespace and
> we properly prevent that in do_fork.
Yes, agreed, with the current meaning of ->pid_ns unshare(NEWPID)
looks safe even if the caller is multi-threaded... and this matches
pidns_install() which doesn't require single-threaded.
Oleg.
--
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