On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 9:43 PM chouryzhou(周威) wrote:
>
> > >
> > > If IPC_NS is disabled, "current-nsporxy->ipc_ns" will also exists, it
> > > will be a static
> > > reference of "init_ipc_ns" (in ipc/msgutil.c, not defined in binder.c by
> > > me) with
> > > no namespace-ization. You will get
> >
> > If IPC_NS is disabled, "current-nsporxy->ipc_ns" will also exists, it will
> > be a static
> > reference of "init_ipc_ns" (in ipc/msgutil.c, not defined in binder.c by
> > me) with
> > no namespace-ization. You will get the same one in all processes,
> > everything is
> > the same as w
On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 8:43 PM chouryzhou(周威) wrote:
>
> If IPC_NS is disabled, "current-nsporxy->ipc_ns" will also exists, it will
> be a static
> reference of "init_ipc_ns" (in ipc/msgutil.c, not defined in binder.c by me)
> with
> no namespace-ization. You will get the same one in all proce
> > > I still don't understand the dependencies on SYSVIPC or POSIX_MQUEUE.
> > > It seems like this mechanism would work even if both are disabled --
> > > as long as IPC_NS is enabled. Seems cleaner to change init/Kconfig and
> > > allow IPC_NS if CONFIG_ANDROID_BINDER_IPC and change this line t
On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 7:09 PM chouryzhou(周威) wrote:
>
> >
> > I still don't understand the dependencies on SYSVIPC or POSIX_MQUEUE.
> > It seems like this mechanism would work even if both are disabled --
> > as long as IPC_NS is enabled. Seems cleaner to change init/Kconfig and
> > allow IPC_NS
>
> I still don't understand the dependencies on SYSVIPC or POSIX_MQUEUE.
> It seems like this mechanism would work even if both are disabled --
> as long as IPC_NS is enabled. Seems cleaner to change init/Kconfig and
> allow IPC_NS if CONFIG_ANDROID_BINDER_IPC and change this line to
> "#ifndef C
On Fri, 09 Nov 2018, Todd Kjos wrote:
print_binder_proc() drops proc->inner_lock and calls
binder_alloc_print_allocated() which acquires proc->alloc->mutex.
Likewise, print_binder_stats() calls print_binder_proc_stats() which
drops its locks to call binder_alloc_print_pages() which also acquires
On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 10:27 AM Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
>
> On Thu, 08 Nov 2018, chouryzhou(??) wrote:
>
> >+#ifdef CONFIG_ANDROID_BINDER_IPC
> >+ /* next fields are for binder */
> >+ struct mutex binder_procs_lock;
> >+ struct hlist_head binder_procs;
> >+ struct
On Thu, 08 Nov 2018, chouryzhou(??) wrote:
+#ifdef CONFIG_ANDROID_BINDER_IPC
+ /* next fields are for binder */
+ struct mutex binder_procs_lock;
+ struct hlist_head binder_procs;
+ struct hlist_head binder_contexts;
+#endif
Now, I took a look at how the binder
On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 5:02 AM chouryzhou(周威) wrote:
>
> We are working for running android in container, but we found that binder is
> not isolated by ipc namespace. Since binder is a form of IPC and therefore
> should
> be tied to ipc namespace. With this patch, we can run more than one andro
On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 01:02:32PM +, chouryzhou(周威) wrote:
> We are working for running android in container, but we found that binder is
> not isolated by ipc namespace. Since binder is a form of IPC and therefore
> should
> be tied to ipc namespace. With this patch, we can run more than o
We are working for running android in container, but we found that binder is
not isolated by ipc namespace. Since binder is a form of IPC and therefore
should
be tied to ipc namespace. With this patch, we can run more than one android
container on one host.
This patch move "binder_procs" and "
12 matches
Mail list logo
