From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Aug 9 03:05:55 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57426E86; Fri, 9 Aug 2013 03:05:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Received: from vps1.elischer.org (vps1.elischer.org [204.109.63.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EFBFB27D5; Fri, 9 Aug 2013 03:05:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jre-mbp.elischer.org (etroy.elischer.org [121.45.226.51]) (authenticated bits=0) by vps1.elischer.org (8.14.7/8.14.6) with ESMTP id r7935mS4093315 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 8 Aug 2013 20:05:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Message-ID: <52045C87.2080203@freebsd.org> Date: Fri, 09 Aug 2013 11:05:43 +0800 From: Julian Elischer User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Don Lewis Subject: Re: Reliable process tracking References: <201308090301.r7931XDc059355@gw.catspoiler.org> In-Reply-To: <201308090301.r7931XDc059355@gw.catspoiler.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Aug 2013 03:05:55 -0000 On 8/9/13 11:01 AM, Don Lewis wrote: > On 9 Aug, Julian Elischer wrote: > >> I've been pondering the possibility of appending a universe (jail) >> number to the >> UIDS, PIDS and various other things. (classes maybe?). >> >> It wouldn't have to be everywhere, but ther eare a number of places >> where comparisons would >> DTRT if they were comparing "my_jail+my_uid" with "his_jail+his_uid", >> instead of just the UIDs. >> It would also help with the "multiple roots" problem, and might >> simplify some of the current code. > If that's all you want, then why not just compare > proc1->p_fd->fd_jdir to proc2->p_fd->fd_jdir > for the jail check? > > > because multiple jails can have the same root directory? there are other tests one can do too, if one is willing to do multiple tests everywhere.