On 12/20, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
>
> + * TODO:
> + * Making SI_ASYNCIO a kernel signal could make this less hacky.
> + */
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PID_NS
> +static inline int siginfo_from_user(siginfo_t *info)
> +{
> + if (!is_si_special(info) && SI_FROMUSER(info) &&
OK, if we can trust SI_FROMUSER(), then it is better, i agree.
I was worried about in-kernel usage of .si_code <= 0 ...
> + info->si_code != SI_ASYNCIO)
but this is horrible, imho.
OK, if we can't change the ABI, then perhaps we can change
kill_pid_info_as_uid() to not send the fatal signals to UNKILLABLE
task? This helper is strange and ugly anyway,
To clarify, I do not blame the patch itself, and I do not suggest
to do this right now.
Oleg.
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
contain...@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel@openvz.org
https://openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
