Oren Laadan [orenl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] wrote: | | | Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote: | > Sukadev Bhattiprolu [sukadev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] wrote: | > | Oren Laadan [orenl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] wrote: | > | > I am not sure what the semantics should be for this case: | > | > - checkpoint a process that is in level-3 pid namespace | > - restart in a level-2 or level-1 pid namespace | > | | Meaning: a container root was at level-3, so tasks in the container | were level-3 through level-(3+N), where N is the in-container depth | so to speak. Then it was restarted such that the base became level-2 | or level-1. | | I think we already covered this. | Sorry, I meant level3 not 'level minus 3' :-) Restating, suppose init_pid_ns is L0, and L3 is a pid namespace 3 levels deep (i.e the process has 4 pids at checkpoint time). When restarting, if the process only needs 2 pids bc it is L1, current behavior is to return -EINVAL. I have this check in copy_target_pids(): + if (num_pids < 0 || num_pids > nesting) + return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL); Is it ok to return -EINVAL when num_pids > nesting ? _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
