From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9])
	by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E9F01FF17C
	for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Wed,  9 Jul 2025 14:59:37 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 6BBDAC3A6;
	Wed,  9 Jul 2025 15:00:20 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2025 15:00:13 +0200
From: Wolfgang Bumiller <w.bumiller@proxmox.com>
To: Filip Schauer <f.schauer@proxmox.com>
Message-ID: <nvhsthfhhe6qlxlb7xruz4k3vezwuzbmhmwqapj2uzmdixwclo@mcnbmt6czyie>
References: <20250611144903.200940-1-f.schauer@proxmox.com>
 <20250611144903.200940-10-f.schauer@proxmox.com>
 <vfje2njhqwdgrtez7yupoxcamgwox7a2kvg3nepdghvgokvzeh@odmtxjbxzsgd>
 <b9200f89-2421-4af6-9c90-0afe78008411@proxmox.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <b9200f89-2421-4af6-9c90-0afe78008411@proxmox.com>
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.079 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 BAYES_00                 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
 DMARC_MISSING             0.1 Missing DMARC policy
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to
 Validity was blocked. See
 https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more
 information.
 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to
 Validity was blocked. See
 https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more
 information.
 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to
 Validity was blocked. See
 https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more
 information.
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH container v2 09/11] manage DHCP for
 containers with custom entrypoint
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
Cc: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com
Sender: "pve-devel" <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>

On Wed, Jul 09, 2025 at 02:43:06PM +0200, Filip Schauer wrote:
> On 25/06/2025 10:50, Wolfgang Bumiller wrote:
> > > +    my $pid = PVE::LXC::find_lxc_pid($vmid);
> > > +    my $rootdir = "/proc/$pid/root";
> > ^ When using this path over a potentially longer period of time it's
> > better to use
> > 
> >      my ($pid, $pidfd) = PVE::LXC::open_lxc_pid($vmid);
> > 
> > The open pidfd should guard against pid reuse during these operations.
> 
> Unfortunatelly /usr/share/lxc/hooks/dhclient-script expects a path in
> $ROOTFS.

Yeah.
So replace the `my $pid = ...` line with what I wrote to keep the
`$pidfd` around for as long as `$rootdir` is being used.


_______________________________________________
pve-devel mailing list
pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel