From: Alexey Izbyshev <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: Florian Weimer <email@example.com>,
Rich Felker <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Andrei Vagin <email@example.com>,
Christian Brauner <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: [musl] vfork()-based posix_spawn() has more failure modes than fork()-based one
Date: Tue, 03 May 2022 00:56:24 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <email@example.com> (raw)
On 2022-05-03 00:49, Alexey Izbyshev wrote:
> On 2022-05-03 00:31, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>> On 5/2/22 17:25, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>> * Rich Felker:
>>>> I'm trying to understand how this comes to be. The child should
>>>> inherit the namespaces of the parent and thus should not be in a
>>>> different namespace that precludes spawn. I'm guessing this is some
>>>> oddity where unshare doesn't affect the process itself, only its
>>>> children? If so, it seems like a bug that it doesn't affect the
>>>> process itself after execve (after unshare(1) runs your test
>>>> but that probably can't be fixed now on the Linux side for stability
>>>> reasons. :(
>>> It's about fundamentally conflicting requirements.
>>> The vDSO data mapping needs to store the time offset, so it has to be
>>> distinct from the original namespace. vfork preserves the VM
>>> It's not possible to do both things at the same time.
>>> unshare(CLONE_NEWTIME) should have been specified to only take effect
>>> after execve, when the vDSO is remapped anyway.
>> Can we ask some kernel developers for an opinion?
> Christian Brauner had some comments [1,2] on this. Time namespaces
> were added in  by Andrei Vagin. Adding both to CC.
(Trying a different email for Andrei Vagin)
>  https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215769#c6
>  https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215769#c10
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-02 21:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-05-02 19:26 Alexey Izbyshev
2022-05-02 20:49 ` Carlos O'Donell
2022-05-02 21:18 ` Rich Felker
2022-05-02 21:25 ` Florian Weimer
2022-05-02 21:31 ` Rich Felker
2023-02-22 22:04 ` Alexey Izbyshev
2022-05-02 21:31 ` Carlos O'Donell
2022-05-02 21:49 ` Alexey Izbyshev
2022-05-02 21:56 ` Alexey Izbyshev [this message]
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).