On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 10:07:43AM +0100, Eduardo Otubo wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 4:42 PM Daniel P. Berrangé
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Eduardo,
> >
> > You acked this series, but going through my old git branches I
> > just discovered that this never got merged. I guess I was assuming
> > you
On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 4:42 PM Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
>
> Hi Eduardo,
>
> You acked this series, but going through my old git branches I
> just discovered that this never got merged. I guess I was assuming
> you had queued it for a future PULL when you acked it.
>
> I don't mind sending a
Hi Eduardo,
You acked this series, but going through my old git branches I
just discovered that this never got merged. I guess I was assuming
you had queued it for a future PULL when you acked it.
I don't mind sending a pull request myself if you've no objections.
On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at
On Mon, 2021-08-02 at 14:02 +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> Blocking the 'fork' syscall on Linux is not sufficient to block the
> 'fork' C library function, because the latter is essentially always
> implemented using the 'clone' syscall these days.
>
> Blocking 'clone' is difficult as that
Blocking the 'fork' syscall on Linux is not sufficient to block the
'fork' C library function, because the latter is essentially always
implemented using the 'clone' syscall these days.
Blocking 'clone' is difficult as that also blocks pthread creation,
so it needs careful filtering.
Daniel P.
