Eric W. Biederman [ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx] wrote: | sukadev@xxxxxxxxxx writes: | > | > Dave had suggested we print a warning the first time a container-init forks() | > without a handler for a fatal signal. I was planning on adding that as | > patch 4 of the signal patch set and get some feedback. | | Yes. How to cleanly handle signalling of container init is | a tricky one. It does sound like you have made a reasonable start | there. | | Suka it is a lot more then that. How much more I'm not certain | of. I suspect the only way to find the rest of the cases is | just go through the code with a fine tooth come and read and look. I agree. I did not mean to ignore the kthread conversions and was only referring to the core pid namespace clone stuff. | | So far doing that it has not at all hard for me to find either | bugs or places where the implementation can be improved. | | Currently we have little things like kill(-1,...) signalling the | wrong set of processes, and a couple of proc bugs. I just realized the fix for this is in the signal patchset I was referring to. https://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/containers/2007-August/006987.html I notice that you have sent a patch for the kill -1. The proc_mnt bug Linus found seems to have slipped through when merging Pavel's and my patches. _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
