[PATCH v5 0/4] pid_namespace: make init creation more flexible

Pavel Tikhomirov posted 4 patches 4 weeks ago
There is a newer version of this series
kernel/exit.c                                 |   3 +-
kernel/fork.c                                 |   5 +-
kernel/pid.c                                  |  19 +-
kernel/pid_namespace.c                        |   9 -
.../selftests/pid_namespace/.gitignore        |   1 +
.../testing/selftests/pid_namespace/Makefile  |   2 +-
.../pid_namespace/pidns_init_via_setns.c      | 238 ++++++++++++++++++
7 files changed, 257 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/pid_namespace/pidns_init_via_setns.c
[PATCH v5 0/4] pid_namespace: make init creation more flexible
Posted by Pavel Tikhomirov 4 weeks ago
The first patch properly annotates accesses to ->child_reaper with
_ONCE macroses, to protect unlocked accesses from possible cpu/compiler
optimization problems.

The second patch makes sure that the init is always a first process in
the pid namespace, previously this was only checked for set_tid case.

The third patch allows to join pid namespace before pid namespace init
is created, that allows to create pid namespace by one process and then
create pid namespace init from another process after setns(). Please see
the detailed description in the patch commit message. It depends on the
second patch.

The forth and the final patch is a comprehansive test, that tests both
basic usecase of creating pid namespace and init separately, and a more
specific usecase which shows how we can improve clone3(set_tid)
usability after this change.

This change is generally useful as it makes clone3(set_tid) more
universal, and let's it work in all the cases evenly. Also it is highly
useful to CRIU to handle nested containers.

v2: Use *_ONCE for ->child_reaper accesses atomicity, and avoid taking
task_list lock for reading it. Rebase to master.
v3: Separate *_ONCE change and "init is first" checks into separate
commits.
v4: Update second patch commit message. Include Oleg's review tags.
v5: Handle one more READ_ONCE case. Include Andrei's review tags. Base
on top of mm tree.

This series is also available here:
https://github.com/Snorch/linux/commits/allow-creating-pid-namespace-init-after-setns-v5-mm-tree/

Signed-off-by: Pavel Tikhomirov <ptikhomirov@virtuozzo.com>

Pavel Tikhomirov (4):
  pid_namespace: avoid optimization of accesses to ->child_reaper
  pid: check init is created first after idr alloc
  pid_namespace: allow opening pid_for_children before init was created
  selftests: Add tests for creating pidns init via setns

 kernel/exit.c                                 |   3 +-
 kernel/fork.c                                 |   5 +-
 kernel/pid.c                                  |  19 +-
 kernel/pid_namespace.c                        |   9 -
 .../selftests/pid_namespace/.gitignore        |   1 +
 .../testing/selftests/pid_namespace/Makefile  |   2 +-
 .../pid_namespace/pidns_init_via_setns.c      | 238 ++++++++++++++++++
 7 files changed, 257 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/pid_namespace/pidns_init_via_setns.c


base-commit: d1b4433308592363d133a788f0443d5d63872bdd
-- 
2.53.0
Re: [PATCH v5 0/4] pid_namespace: make init creation more flexible
Posted by Andrew Morton 3 weeks, 6 days ago
On Fri, 13 Mar 2026 12:09:38 +0100 Pavel Tikhomirov <ptikhomirov@virtuozzo.com> wrote:

> To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,

Actually Christian is much more pid_namespacey than am I.

Christian, a MAINTAINERS record would be helpful?
Re: [PATCH v5 0/4] pid_namespace: make init creation more flexible
Posted by Christian Brauner 3 weeks, 3 days ago
On Sat, Mar 14, 2026 at 03:32:03PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Mar 2026 12:09:38 +0100 Pavel Tikhomirov <ptikhomirov@virtuozzo.com> wrote:
> 
> > To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> > Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
> 
> Actually Christian is much more pid_namespacey than am I.
> 
> Christian, a MAINTAINERS record would be helpful?

Yeah, sure. I can add one.