On Sun, 10.05.15 19:29, Alban Crequy (alban.cre...@gmail.com) wrote: > From: Alban Crequy <al...@endocode.com> > > When a process starts systemd-nspawn with exec*() without fork(), > systemd-nspawn can be the parent process of children processes unknown > to systemd-nspawn. It can then receive the signal SIGCHLD for both the > container leader process and the previously started processes. So it > should distinguish them.
Is this still relevant? systemd-nspawn uses waitid(P_PID) and specifies the container's main PID, thus it should explicitly only wait for that and not get confused by other PIDs. Hence I am not really getting what the patch is about... (I mean, it will not reap those other processes, but it will not get confused by them either...) I am pretty sure we should never bother with SIGCHLD for this. It's the wrong kind of notification. If this still is an issue, and this is about reaping unknown processes, then I'd be open to extending wait_for_terminate() to also reap all unknown processes while we wait for the one we really care about... Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
