Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 5 Dec 2011 21:50:35 +0100 | From | Oleg Nesterov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/1][V3] Handle reboot in a child pid namespace |
| |
On 12/05, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > > On 12/04/2011 10:27 PM, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > > On Sun, 04 Dec 2011, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > > Daniel, can you address Miquel's concern? Is it a valid concern, or > > not? I assume CAP_REBOOT functionality is still in place inside the > > container, so it really does look like userspace would need to know > > whether it should drop CAP_REBOOT or not, in order to automatically use > > the new feature. > > Hmm, I missed its email.
Me too... so I am not sure I really understand the problem.
> I would like to address this in a separate patch in order to discuss the > best way to do that.
Agreed.
> Adding a fake 'reboot' parameter returning EINVAL > or 0 seems a good solution to detect at runtime if the shutdown is > correctly supported inside a container.
Or, perhaps, we can implement sys_reboot(REBOOT_SHOULD_NOT_WORK), sub-init can call it to disable the shutdown ?
This needs the trivial modifications in zap_pid_ns_processes() and reboot_pid_ns().
Oleg.
| |