On 11/25/25 04:42, Aleksei Oladko wrote:
> The new helper returns pid in root pidns of VE
>
> Signed-off-by: Aleksei Oladko <[email protected]>
> ---
> include/linux/ve.h | 17 +++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/ve.h b/include/linux/ve.h
> index 37562dff25aa..b99faaba6e48 100644
> --- a/include/linux/ve.h
> +++ b/include/linux/ve.h
> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
> #include <asm/vdso.h>
> #include <linux/time_namespace.h>
> #include <linux/binfmts.h>
> +#include <linux/pid.h>
>
> struct nsproxy;
> struct user_namespace;
> @@ -191,6 +192,22 @@ static inline struct ve_struct *css_to_ve(struct
> cgroup_subsys_state *css)
>
> extern struct cgroup_subsys_state *ve_get_init_css(struct ve_struct *ve, int
> subsys_id);
>
> +static inline pid_t task_pid_ve_nr(struct task_struct *tsk)
> +{
> + struct nsproxy *ve_ns;
> + pid_t pid;
> +
> + rcu_read_lock();
> + ve_ns = rcu_dereference(get_exec_env()->ve_ns);
In case of show_signal_msg() this helper is completely fine. But do we really
want to use current ve here? I think it would be a bit more consistent to take
ve not from current task but from the "tsk" itself.
In other words, when host task (from ve0) uses task_pid_ve_nr() on container
task, we might get confused, because the task_pid_ve_nr() helper would return
the pid in host init pid namespace.
> + if (ve_ns)
> + pid = task_pid_nr_ns(tsk, ve_ns->pid_ns_for_children);
> + else
> + pid = task_pid_nr(tsk);
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> +
> + return pid;
> +}
> +
> static inline struct time_namespace *ve_get_time_ns(struct ve_struct *ve)
> {
> struct nsproxy *ve_ns;
--
Best regards, Pavel Tikhomirov
Senior Software Developer, Virtuozzo.
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
