Re: question: pid space semantics.

On Tue, 2006-03-14 at 11:43 -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> The question:
>   If we could add additional pid values in different pid spaces to a
>   process with a syscall upon demand would that lead to an
>   implementation everyone could use? 

So, you'd basically only allocate the cross-namespace pids when you
needed to do some kind of cross-namespace management?

pid_t alloc_local_pid(container_handle, pid_t pid_inside_container)

-- Dave

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: question: pid space semantics.
    • From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)

• References:
  • question: pid space semantics.
    • From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)

• Prev by Date: Re: 2.6.16-rc6-mm1 : Setting clocksource results in error
• Next by Date: Re: [Patch 0/9] Per-task delay accounting
• Previous by thread: question: pid space semantics.
• Next by thread: Re: question: pid space semantics.
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]