From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5FDDC4338F for ; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 01:41:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A562F60E97 for ; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 01:41:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235019AbhG3BlQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Jul 2021 21:41:16 -0400 Received: from zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk ([142.44.231.140]:43430 "EHLO zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233925AbhG3BlQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Jul 2021 21:41:16 -0400 Received: from viro by zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1m9HWN-00540v-3i; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 01:41:07 +0000 Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2021 01:41:07 +0000 From: Al Viro To: Christian Brauner Cc: John Cotton Ericson , LKML , David Laight , Andy Lutomirski , "Jason A. Donenfeld" , Kernel Hardening , Jann Horn , Christian Brauner Subject: Re: Leveraging pidfs for process creation without fork Message-ID: References: <20210729142415.qovpzky537zkg3dp@wittgenstein> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210729142415.qovpzky537zkg3dp@wittgenstein> Sender: Al Viro Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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.