Oren Laadan [orenl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] wrote: | > | I should have mentioned earlier, but there is also the case of | > | CLONE_NEWPID. If CLONE_NEWPID is given, then @nesting should be | > | plus one, _and_ the corresponding pid must be 1 or 0. | > | > Right. do_fork_with_pids() checks if CLONE_NEWPID is specified with | > target_pids and returns -EINVAL for now. | | Any reason not to handle this case already ? The only reason was that we are not planning on supporting C/R of nested containers for a while, but yes, we don't need to restrict clone_with_pids(). | | I have a simpler suggestion than above: pass the clone_flags to | copy_target_pids(), and in there, if CLONE_NEWPID is set, then | you should allocate an array +1 in size, and force last slot to | be 0 (or 1). User doesn't have to pass a larger array. Looks like it would be cleaner code-wise, to always allocate an extra element in the target_pids list and leave the last one set to 0. If CLONE_NEWPID is set, alloc_pid() will assign the first pid in the new namespace. If it is not set, the last element will never be referenced in alloc_pid(). _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
