[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2021 01:41:07 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>
Cc: John Cotton Ericson <mail@...nericson.me>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
"Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>,
Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
Jann Horn <jann@...jh.net>,
Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...onical.com>
Subject: Re: Leveraging pidfs for process creation without fork
On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 04:24:15PM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 12:37:57PM -0400, John Cotton Ericson wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I was excited to learn about about pidfds the other day, precisely in hopes
> > that it would open the door to such a "sane process creation API". I
> > searched the LKML, found this thread, and now hope to rekindle the
> > discussion; my apologies if there has been more discussion since that I
>
> Yeah, I haven't forgotten this discussion. A proposal is on my todo list
> for this year. So far I've scheduled some time to work on this in the
> fall.
Keep in mind that quite a few places in kernel/exit.c very much rely upon the
lack of anything outside of thread group adding threads into it. Same for
fs/exec.c.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
