[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131118180259.GA11722@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 19:02:59 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: Stanislav Kinsbursky <skinsbursky@...allels.com>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, devel@...nvz.org, bfields@...ldses.org,
bharrosh@...asas.com
Subject: Re: call_usermodehelper in containers
On 11/18, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> On 11/15, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >
> > I don't understand that one. Having a preforked thread with the proper
> > environment that can act like kthreadd in terms of spawning user mode
> > helpers works and is simple.
>
> Can't we ask ->child_reaper to create the non-daemonized kernel thread
> with the "right" ->nsproxy, ->fs, etc?
>
> IOW. Please the the "patch" below. It is obviously incomplete and wrong,
> and it can be more clear/clean. And probably we need another API. Just
> to explain what I mean.
Or, perhaps UMH_IN_MY_NS should only work if ->child_reaper explicitly
does, say, prctl(PR_SPAWN_UMH_IN_NS_HELPER) which forks the non-daemonized
kernel kthread_worker thread, I dunno.
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