Quoting Oren Laadan (orenl@xxxxxxxxxxx): > Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote: > > Matt Helsley [matthltc@xxxxxxxxxx] wrote: > > | > If userspace passes an array with n pids and there are k namespace levels > > | > then clone_with_pids() makes sure that the kernel sees a pid array like: > > | > > > | > index 0 ... k - (n + 1) ... k - 1 > > | > +-----------------------+-------------------------+ > > | > pid_t | 0 ..................0 | <copied from userspace> | > > | > +-----------------------+-------------------------+ > > | > > | (diagram assumes n != k. If n == k then pids[0] is the pid desired > > | in the initial namespace..) > > > > True. > > > > Also I was not sure if we should prevent choosing pids in ancestor containers. > > since a process is not even supposed to know of ancestor namespaces. Is there > > a need for choosing pids in those namespaces. Yes, that is necessary. > > | I don't know if it makes more sense to change clone_with_pids() or have > > | [e]glibc wrappers swap the array contents. > > I prefer to decide now on an order and stick to it in the kernel and > in glibc. Agreed! I'd forgotten that, as Matt said, we can just specify pids to the depth that we want, so I guess the current order is fine. -serge _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
