Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756292Ab3H2XzN (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Aug 2013 19:55:13 -0400 Received: from out01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.231]:53431 "EHLO out01.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753446Ab3H2XzK (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Aug 2013 19:55:10 -0400 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Linux Containers Cc: "Serge E. Hallyn" , , Oleg Nesterov References: <87ob8gys0d.fsf@xmission.com> Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 16:55:01 -0700 In-Reply-To: <87ob8gys0d.fsf@xmission.com> (Eric W. Biederman's message of "Thu, 29 Aug 2013 16:52:18 -0700") Message-ID: <87a9k0yrvu.fsf@xmission.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-XM-AID: U2FsdGVkX19wiWvBIH0MFIB9zeAQfAIuN/wr3HHhp3I= X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 98.207.154.105 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com X-Spam-Report: * -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP * 1.5 XMNoVowels Alpha-numberic number with no vowels * 1.5 TR_Symld_Words too many words that have symbols inside * 0.7 XMSubLong Long Subject * -0.5 BAYES_05 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 1 to 5% * [score: 0.0124] * -0.0 DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE Not listed in DCC * [sa05 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1] * 0.0 T_TooManySym_04 7+ unique symbols in subject * 0.0 T_TooManySym_01 4+ unique symbols in subject * 0.0 T_TooManySym_03 6+ unique symbols in subject * 0.0 T_TooManySym_02 5+ unique symbols in subject X-Spam-DCC: XMission; sa05 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 X-Spam-Combo: **;Linux Containers X-Spam-Relay-Country: Subject: [REVIEW][PATCH 3/5] pidns: Don't have unshare(CLONE_NEWPID) imply CLONE_THREAD X-Spam-Flag: No X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 14 Nov 2012 14:26:46 -0700) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in02.mta.xmission.com) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1678 Lines: 44 I goofed when I made unshare(CLONE_NEWPID) only work in a single-threaded process. There is no need for that requirement and in fact I analyzied things right for setns. The hard requirement is for tasks that share a VM to all be in the pid namespace and we properly prevent that in do_fork. Just to be certain I took a look through do_wait and forget_original_parent and there are no cases that make it any harder for children to be in the multiple pid namespaces than it is for children to be in the same pid namespace. I also performed a check to see if there were in uses of task->nsproxy_pid_ns I was not familiar with, but it is only used when allocating a new pid for a new task, and in checks to prevent craziness from happening. Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" --- kernel/fork.c | 5 ----- 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/fork.c b/kernel/fork.c index 66635c8..eb45f1d 100644 --- a/kernel/fork.c +++ b/kernel/fork.c @@ -1818,11 +1818,6 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE1(unshare, unsigned long, unshare_flags) if (unshare_flags & CLONE_NEWUSER) unshare_flags |= CLONE_THREAD | CLONE_FS; /* - * If unsharing a pid namespace must also unshare the thread. - */ - if (unshare_flags & CLONE_NEWPID) - unshare_flags |= CLONE_THREAD; - /* * If unsharing a thread from a thread group, must also unshare vm. */ if (unshare_flags & CLONE_THREAD) -- 1.7.5.4 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/