Re: pid ns feature request

[Eric W. Biederman]

Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Unless I'm missing some trick, it's currently rather painful to mount
> a namespace /proc.  You have to actually be in the pid namespace to
> mount the correct /proc instance, and you can't unmount the old /proc
> until you've mounted the new /proc.  This means that you have to fork
> into the new pid namespace before you can finish setting it up.

Yes.  You have to be inside just about all namespaces before you can
finish setting them up.

I don't know the context in which needed to be inside the pid namespace
is a burden.

> Would it make sense to add a mount option to procfs to request a mount
> for pid_ns_for_children instead of task_active_pid_ns?

This is about the using setns and unshare?

Adding a proc amount option that takes a pid namespace file descriptor
would be the general solution, and might be worth implementing.

Getting a pid namespace file descriptors when there are no pids might be
a challenge.

Eric
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/