On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 09:49:39PM -0500, Neil Horman wrote: > On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 02:25:34PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 13:12:20 -0500 > > Neil Horman <nhorman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 06:20:48AM -0600, Serge Hallyn wrote: > > > > Quoting Neil Horman (nhorman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx): > > > > > Theres one problem I currently see with it, and that is that I'm not sure we can > > > > > change the current behavior of how the root fs is set for the pipe reader, lest > > > > > we break some user space expectations. As such, I've added a sysctl in this > > > > > patch to allow administrators to globally select if a core reader specified via > > > > > /proc/sys/kernel/core_pattern should use the global rootfs, or the (possibly) > > > > > chrooted fs of the crashing process. > > > > > > > > Practical question: How is the admin to make an educated decision on > > > > how to set the sysctl? > > > > By reading the documentation which Neil didn't include? > > > Yeah, that was stupid of me, I'll respin this with docs. > > > > My thought was that the admin typically wouldn't touch this at all. I really > > > added it as a backwards compatibility option only. Setting the user space > > > helper task to the root of the crashing parent has the possibility of breaking > > > existing installs because the core_pattern helper might be expecting global file > > > system access. Moving forward, my expectation would be that core_pattern > > > helpers would be written with the default setting in mind, and we could > > > eventually deprecate the control entirely. > > > > > > If you have a better mechanism in mind however (or if you think that removing > > > the control is a resaonable approach), I'm certainly open to that. > > > > Yeah, this is a tiresome patch but I can't think of a better way. > > > > Except, perhaps, adding a new token to the core_pattern which says > > "switch namespaces"? > > > I like that idea, perhaps '||' instead of '|' as the leading token can indicate > "use the namespace root" vs. "use the global root". Thoughts? That seems like a nicer idea to me, than the extra sysctl knob. Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
