Re: [PATCH 1/1][V3] Add reboot_pid_ns to handle the reboot syscall

[Andrew Morton]

On Sun,  4 Dec 2011 21:24:50 +0100
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> In the case of a child pid namespace, rebooting the system does not
> really makes sense. When the pid namespace is used in conjunction
> with the other namespaces in order to create a linux container, the
> reboot syscall leads to some problems.
> 
> A container can reboot the host. That can be fixed by dropping
> the sys_reboot capability but we are unable to correctly to poweroff/
> halt/reboot a container and the container stays stuck at the shutdown
> time with the container's init process waiting indefinitively.
> 
> After several attempts, no solution from userspace was found to reliabily
> handle the shutdown from a container.
> 
> This patch propose to store the reboot value in the 16 upper bits of the
> exit code from the processes belonging to a pid namespace which has
> rebooted. When the reboot syscall is called and we are not in the initial
> pid namespace, we kill the pid namespace.
> 
> By this way the parent process of the child pid namespace to know if
> it rebooted or not and take the right decision.

hm, modifying the exit code in this manner is a strange interface.  I
didn't see that coming.  Perhaps some additional justification for this
idea should be added to the changelog, along with discussion of
alternative schemes.  I don't immediately see any problems with it,
but, odd...  I wonder what potential it has to upset existing
userspace.

Also, do we need to reserve all upper 16 bits of the exit code?  It
would be better to formally leave some free for future use.

Also, this alters the interface of wait4() and friends, yes?  If so,
that should be documented in the manpages.  Please Cc Michael on such
changes.

Also, this affects the data delivered by taskstats, I believe.  Please
check this, test it, document it in the changelog and update
getdelays.c appropriately.

Also, glibc might be affected.  For symmetry we might want to add a
WIFREBOOT() or something.  And we now expect waitid() to fill in extra
bits in siginfo_t.si_status, which assumes that glibc (and other
libc's!) aren't using a u8 in there somewhere.  etcetera.  This all
should be tested, and reviewed by Uli (please).

>
> ...
>
> --- a/kernel/sys.c
> +++ b/kernel/sys.c
> @@ -444,6 +444,9 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE4(reboot, int, magic1, int, magic2, unsigned int, cmd,
>  	                magic2 != LINUX_REBOOT_MAGIC2C))
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  
> +	if (task_active_pid_ns(current) != &init_pid_ns)
> +		return reboot_pid_ns(task_active_pid_ns(current), cmd);

This adds a bunch of useless code if CONFIG_PID_NS=n.  It would be
better to do

#ifdef CONFIG_PID_NS
extern void pidns_handle_reboot(int cmd);
#else
static inline void pidns_handle_reboot(int cmd)
{
}
#endif


--
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/