musl - Re: pthread_mutex_t shared between processes with different pid namespaces

Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <878qqpbqk7.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com>
Date: Sat, 01 Feb 2025 17:03:20 +0100
From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>
To: Daniele Personal <d.dario76@...il.com>
Cc: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>,  d.dario76@...il.com,
  musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: pthread_mutex_t shared between processes with different
 pid namespaces

* Daniele Personal:

>> Is this required for implementing the unlock-if-not-owner error code
>> on mutex unlock?
>
> No, I don't see problems related to EOWNERDEAD.

Sorry, what I meant is that the TID is needed for efficient reporting of
usage errors.  It's not imposed by the robust list protocol as such.
There could be a PID-namespace-compatible robust mutex type that does
not have this problem (but with less error checking).

Thanks,
Florian

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.