On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 12:25 AM Jia, Hongxu <Hongxu.Jia@...
> On 2/9/22 06:53, Khem Raj wrote:
> diff --git a/meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc/0001-fix-create-thread-failed-in-unprivileged-process-BZ-.patch b/meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc/0001-fix-create-thread-failed-in-unprivileged-process-BZ-.patch
> deleted file mode 100644
> index 3283dd7ad8a..00000000000
> --- a/meta/recipes-core/glibc/glibc/0001-fix-create-thread-failed-in-unprivileged-process-BZ-.patch
> +++ /dev/null
> @@ -1,79 +0,0 @@
> -From a8bc44936202692edcd82a48c07d7cf27d6ed8ee Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> -From: Hongxu Jia <hongxu.jia@...
> -Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2021 20:49:16 +0800
> -Subject: [PATCH] fix create thread failed in unprivileged process [BZ #28287]
> -Since commit [d8ea0d0168 Add an internal wrapper for clone, clone2 and clone3]
> -applied, start a unprivileged container (docker run without --privileged),
> -it creates a thread failed in container.
> -In commit d8ea0d0168, it calls __clone3 if HAVE_CLONE3_WAPPER is defined. If
> -__clone3 returns -1 with ENOSYS, fall back to clone or clone2.
> -As known from , cloneXXX fails with EPERM if CLONE_NEWCGROUP,
> -CLONE_NEWIPC, CLONE_NEWNET, CLONE_NEWNS, CLONE_NEWPID, or CLONE_NEWUTS
> -was specified by an unprivileged process (process without CAP_SYS_ADMIN)
> -So if __clone3 returns -1 with EPERM, fall back to clone or clone2 could
> -fix the issue. Here are the test steps:
> Hi RP,
> I found this local patch was removed from glibc, we have to get it back and regenerate uninative to avoid the thread creation failure in unprivileged container
I intentionally dropped it since upstream glibc will not accept this
patch since its not glibc problem but
rather container runtime problem. Can you investigate that path before
we reapply it. Maintaining a rejected patch is last thing we want to