Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Make core_pattern support namespace
To: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Mateusz Guzik <mguzik@redhat.com>
References: <cover.1458119582.git.zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com>
Cc: containers@lists.linux-foundation.org
From: Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Message-ID: <56EA00FC.3030800@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 09:57:32 +0900
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <cover.1458119582.git.zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-2022-jp
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 930
Lines: 28

On 2016/03/16 18:23, Zhao Lei wrote:
> We discussed patch titled:
>   [PATCH] Make core_pattern support namespace
> before.
> 
> Above patch can solve half problem of custom core_dump pattern
> in container, but there are also another problem that limit
> custom core_pattern in container, it is the pipe-type core_pattern
> will write core dump into host's filesystem.
> (See discussion of that patch for detail)
> 
> Now we can solve the second problem by [PATCH 1/2], I send
> the origional patch with it.
> 

Let me know your design...

This patch does using fork+execve() rather than calling UMH in pipe-coredump pass.
And coredump-pipe process is run as a child of get-dumped process.
Right ?

Doesn't this break existing solution actually used in distro ?

BTW, it's first time for me to see that _do_fork() is called outside from fork.c.
Isn't it better to add a new func in fork.c if we really need this ?

Thanks,
-Kame