It is pointless and confusing to allow a pid namespace hierarchy and
the user namespace hierarchy to get out of sync.  The owner of a child
pid namespace should be the owner of the parent pid namespace or
a descendant of the owner of the parent pid namespace.

Otherwise it is possible to construct scenarios where a process has a
capability over a parent pid namespace but does not have the
capability over a child pid namespace.  Which confusingly makes
permission checks non-transitive.

It requires use of setns into a pid namespace (but not into a user
namespace) to create such a scenario.

Add the function in_userns to help in making this determination.

v2: Optimized in_userns by using level as suggested
    by: Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@virtuozzo.com>

Ref: 49f4d8b9

 ("pidns: Capture the user namespace and filter ns_last_pid")
Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>