[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140526180443.GA11145@cachalot>
Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 22:04:43 +0400
From: Vasily Kulikov <segooon@...il.com>
To: Chen Hanxiao <chenhanxiao@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@...ntu.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] /proc/pid/status: show all sets of pid according to ns
Hi Chen,
On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 18:05 +0800, Chen Hanxiao wrote:
> We need a direct method of getting the pid inside containers.
> If some issues occurred inside a container guest, host user
> could not know which process is in trouble just by guest pid:
> the users of container guest only knew the pid inside containers.
> This will bring obstacle for trouble shooting.
>
> This patch expands fields of Tgid and Pid:
> a) In init_pid_ns, nothing changed;
>
> b) In one pidns, they will tell the pid inside containers:
> Tgid: 1628 9 3
> Pid: 1628 9 3
> ** process id is 1628 in level 0, 9 in level 1, 3 in level 2.
1. It breaks ABI. Any application which does something like "grep pid: | cut -d: -f2"
is now broken by the patch. Maybe add a new field like 'Pid-ns', 'PidNS',
or 'Pids' and leave the old one for compatibility?
2. Is it OK to show internal pids to unprivileged processes? I cannot
see anything obviously dangerous with it, though.
> c) If pidns is nested, it depends on which pidns are you in.
> Tgid: 9 3
> Pid: 9 3
> ** Views from level 1 for Pid 1628 in host.
--
Vasily
--
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