Cedric Le Goater <clg@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> Guys how complete do you fee the pid namespace support is that >> has been merged into Linus's tree? >> >> My impression until I started reading through code earlier today >> was that the support was just about done except for a couple of >> tricky details. > > Yes It looks sane. > > Here's what I have in mind : > > * there are some patches from suka that make sure the pid namespace init > is not getting abusively killed by one of this children > * the pid cleanup is not complete > . locks > . kthread (i should work soon on improving kthread to support > signals) > > IMO, the proc mount shouldn't be under the pid namespace. we will > need that sooner or later. I was hoping to get a larger list of unfixed issues. Currently from my review I have generated about 25 bugfix patches. Several of them in some fairly obvious places. I think it is a good base to build on, but it feels to like we still have a significant ways to go. I think the assumption that we can use global pid numbers instead of instead of struct pids is racy, and a serious maintenance problem. It leads to silent breakage of routines like get_net_ns_by_pid, and possibly a couple of other places. I'm really not happy with pid_nr meaning a pid number in the init_pid_ns and pid_vnr meaning a pid number meaning a pid in the local pid namespace. But that is just a matter of names so I don't think it has caused any problems. Short of making it to easy to get a pid number in the &init_pid_ns. Eric _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers