Hello ! >>> The worst case I can see with pid == 0. Is that it would be a bug >>> that we can fix later. For other cases it would seem to be a user >>> space API thing that we get stuck with for all time. >> We cannot trust userspace application to expect some pid other than >> positive. All that we can is either use some always-absent pid or >> send the signal as SI_KERNEL. >> >> Our experience show that making decisions like above causes random <>> applications failures that are hard (or even impossible) to debug. > Ok. So I guess I see what you are proposing is picking an arbitrary > pid, say pid == 2, and reserving that in all pid namespaces and using > it when we have a pid that does not map to a specific namespace. I'm > fine with that. > > All I care about is that we have a solution, preferably simple, > to the non-mapped pid problem. Pavel, are you against using pid == 0 and setting si_code to SI_KERNEL ? C. _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
