Messages in this thread | | | From | Thomas Gleixner <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 0/6] arm64: add the time namespace support | Date | Fri, 24 Jul 2020 15:22:34 +0200 |
| |
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> writes: > On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 10:25:35PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >> Andrei Vagin <avagin@gmail.com> writes: >> > On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 07:15:06PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: >> > >> > I don't think that we need to handle this case in the kernel. Users >> > must understand what they are doing and have to write code so that avoid >> > these sort of situations. In general, I would say that in most cases it >> > is a bad idea to call setns from a signal handler. >> >> This should not be supported in the first place and just let the >> offender die right there. > > It would have been nice if we caught the offender easily but since > signal handling doesn't have to be paired with sigreturn(), the kernel > can't tell whether setns() is called in the wrong context. I guess we > just have to live with this (maybe document the restriction in > time_namespaces(7) or setns(2)).
Yes, I know that it's more or less impossible. The 'should' was just wishful thinking :)
But yes, proper documentation is required.
Thanks,
tglx
| |