On 08/17, Kay Sievers wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 15:05, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > But, I seem to remember, that patch cleared ->child_reaper on exec, > > I don't think he original patch did. > > > I think this makes sense. > > Why would it? Systemd can serialize its state and properly re-exec > itself as many times as needed during its lifetime. Why would the > kernel take something away from a process, which it explicitly asked > for? > > > And I am not sure about security. No, I do not see any problems, just > > I don't know. Say, should we check the creds during reparenting? I > > dunno. > > Hmm, I don't see why that would be necessary. It's just one of our > parents that aks for our signals. Oh, I do not know. I do not pretend I understand the security ;) For example. I simply can't understand why do we have security_task_wait(). Why waitpid(my_natural_child) can fail for security reasons? But we have selinux_task_wait(). So, once again. I am not arguing. I am only asking the questions. I didn't mean I see any problem here. Oleg. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
