Message-ID: <e94c2ba9-226b-8275-bef7-28e854be3ffa@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 22 Nov 2021 17:00:25 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.2.1
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] namespacefs: Proof-of-Concept
Content-Language: en-US
To:     James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, mingo@redhat.com, hagen@jauu.net,
        rppt@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, vvs@virtuozzo.com,
        shakeelb@google.com, christian.brauner@ubuntu.com,
        mkoutny@suse.com, Linux Containers <containers@lists.linux.dev>,
        "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
References: <20211118181210.281359-1-y.karadz@gmail.com>
 <87a6i1xpis.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org>
 <20211118142440.31da20b3@gandalf.local.home>
 <1349346e1d5daca991724603d1495ec311cac058.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
 <20211119092758.1012073e@gandalf.local.home>
 <f6ca1f5bdb3b516688f291d9685a6a59f49f1393.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
 <20211119114736.5d9dcf6c@gandalf.local.home>
 <20211119114910.177c80d6@gandalf.local.home>
 <cc6783315193be5acb0e2e478e2827d1ad76ba2a.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
 <ba0f624c-fc24-a3f4-749a-00e419960de2@gmail.com>
 <4d2b08aa854fcccd51247105edb18fe466a2a3f1.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
From:   Yordan Karadzhov <y.karadz@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4d2b08aa854fcccd51247105edb18fe466a2a3f1.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk


On 22.11.21 г. 15:44 ч., James Bottomley wrote:
> Well, no, the information may not all exist.  However, the point is we
> can add it without adding additional namespace objects.
> 
>> Let's look the following case (oversimplified just to get the idea):
>> 1. The process X is a parent of the process Y and both are in
>> namespace 'A'.
>> 3. "unshare" is used to place process Y (and all its child processes)
>> in a new namespace B (A is a parent namespace of B).
>> 4. "setns" is s used to move process X in namespace C.
>>
>> How would you find the parent namespace of B?
> Actually this one's quite easy: the parent of X in your setup still has
> it.

Hmm, Isn't that true only if somehow we know that (3) happened before (4).

> However, I think you're looking to set up a scenario where the
> namespace information isn't carried by live processes and that's
> certainly possible if we unshare the namespace, bind it to a mount
> point and exit the process that unshared it.  If will exist as a bound
> namespace with no processes until it gets entered via the binding and
> when that happens the parent information can't be deduced from the
> process tree.
> 
> There's another problem, that I think you don't care about but someone
> will at some point: the owning user_ns can't be deduced from the
> current tree either because it depends on the order of entry.  We fixed
> unshare so that if you enter multiple namespaces, it enters the user_ns
> first so the latter is always the owning namespace, but if you enter
> the rest of the namespaces first via one unshare then unshare the
> user_ns second, that won't be true.
> 
> Neither of the above actually matter for docker like containers because
> that's not the way the orchestration system works (it doesn't use mount
> bindings or the user_ns) but one day, hopefully, it might.
> 
>> Again, using your arguments, I can reformulate the problem statement
>> this way: a userspace program is well instrumented
>> to create an arbitrary complex tree of namespaces. In the same time,
>> the only place where the information about the
>> created structure can be retrieved is in the userspace program
>> itself. And when we have multiple userspace programs
>> adding to the namespaces tree, the global picture gets impossible to
>> recover.
> So figure out what's missing in the /proc tree and propose adding it.
> The interface isn't immutable it's just that what exists today is an
> ABI and can't be altered.  I think this is the last time we realised we
> needed to add missing information in/proc/<pid>/ns:
> 
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=eaa0d190bfe1ed891b814a52712dcd852554cb08
> 
> So you can use that as the pattern.
> 

OK, if everybody agrees that adding extra information to /proc is the right way to go, we will be happy to try 
developing another PoC that implements this approach.

Thank you very much for all your help!
Yordan

> James
> 
>