KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] wrote: | On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 12:26:38 -0800 | Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: | | > | > Container-init must behave like global-init to processes within the | > container and hence it must be immune to unhandled fatal signals from | > within the container (i.e SIG_DFL signals that terminate the process). | > | > But the same container-init must behave like a normal process to | > processes in ancestor namespaces and so if it receives the same fatal | > signal from a process in ancestor namespace, the signal must be | > processed. | > | > Implementing these semantics requires that send_signal() determine pid | > namespace of the sender but since signals can originate from workqueues/ | > interrupt-handlers, determining pid namespace of sender may not always | > be possible or safe. | > | | Is this feature is for blocking signals from children to name-space | creator(owner) ? And automatically used when namespace/cgroup is created ? | IOW, Container-init is Namespace-Cgroup-init ? I am not sure what "Namespace-cgroup-init refers" to. But, yes, this patchset applies to the first process in a pid namespace i.e the child of clone(NEWPID) call. | | I'm glad if you add some documentation updates about how-it-works to patch set. Yes, when the patchset is accepted, I am planning to add some notes to /sbin/init man page. Thanks, Sukadev _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
