Christian Brauner <christian.brau...@canonical.com> writes: > On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 12:12 PM Daniel Colascione <dan...@google.com> wrote: >> >> On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 11:04 AM, Christian Brauner >> <christian.brau...@canonical.com> wrote: >> > On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 11:48 AM Daniel Colascione <dan...@google.com> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> Why not? >> >> >> >> Does your proposed API allow for a race-free pkill, with arbitrary >> >> selection criteria? This capability is a good litmus test for fixing >> >> the long-standing Unix process API issues. >> > >> > You'd have a handle on the process with an fd so yes, it would be. >> >> Thanks. That's good to hear. >> >> Any idea on the timetable for this proposal? I'm open to lots of >> alternative technical approaches, but I don't want this capability to >> languish for a long time. > > Latest end of year likely sooner depending on the feedback I'm getting > during LPC.
Frankly. If you want a race free fork variant probably the easiest thing to do is to return a open copy of the proc directory entry. Wrapped in a bind mount so that you can't see beyond that directory in proc. My only concern would be if a vfsmount per process would be too heavy for such a use. Eric
