From: Serge E. Hallyn on
Quoting Oleg Nesterov (oleg(a)redhat.com):
> zap_pid_ns_processes() uses force_sig(SIGKILL) to ensure SIGKILL
> will be delivered to sub-namespace inits as well. This is correct,
> but we are going to change force_sig_info() semantics.
> See http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15395#c31
>
> We can use send_sig_info(SEND_SIG_NOINFO) instead, since
> 614c517d7c00af1b26ded20646b329397d6f51a1 SEND_SIG_NOINFO means
> "from user" and therefore send_signal() will get the correct
> from_ancestor_ns = T flag.
>
> Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg(a)redhat.com>

Justification makes sense, and (in some superficial testing, killing some
nested pid_ns's) the patch seems to do the right thing.

Acked-by: Serge Hallyn <serue(a)us.ibm.com>

> ---
>
> kernel/pid_namespace.c | 7 +++----
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> --- mm/kernel/pid_namespace.c~NS_DONT_ABUSE_FORCE 2010-02-25 15:22:13.000000000 +0100
> +++ mm/kernel/pid_namespace.c 2010-03-03 20:58:12.000000000 +0100
> @@ -161,13 +161,12 @@ void zap_pid_ns_processes(struct pid_nam
> rcu_read_lock();
>
> /*
> - * Use force_sig() since it clears SIGNAL_UNKILLABLE ensuring
> - * any nested-container's init processes don't ignore the
> - * signal
> + * Any nested-container's init processes won't ignore the
> + * SEND_SIG_NOINFO signal, see send_signal()->si_fromuser().
> */
> task = pid_task(find_vpid(nr), PIDTYPE_PID);
> if (task)
> - force_sig(SIGKILL, task);
> + send_sig_info(SIGKILL, SEND_SIG_NOINFO, task);
>
> rcu_read_unlock();
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/