Re: [patch] PID namespace design bug, workaround

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 

On Fri, Nov 02, 2007 at 06:58:47PM +0300, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
> Having access to the same IPCs in different pid namespaces won't work.
> Having access to the same filesystem in different IPC namespaces won't work.
> Having access to the same UID namespace in different VFS namespaces won't work.
> Having access to the same <any> namespace in different <many others> namespace
>  wont' work.
> 
> That's the idea OpenVZ tried to promote when the story with "containers"
> started, but most of the other participants decided that we can create
> individual namespaces and step-by-step try to make them work in all the
> possible combinations.

Heh.  Well, this won't be the first time that we go around the design
circle wiht people objecting with the idea eventually figuring out
that the original idea really was the only sane way to do things.  :-)

Maybe it would be instructive to create a matrix which lists areas
where processes that share namespace FOO but not namespace BAR would
result in breakage, with an explanation of what breaks in a particular
instance?  Assuming we continue to go down the path of orthogonal
namespace, having a file in Documentation/ which lists places where
there different namepsaces have dependencies on each other for correct
system call operation would be a Good Thing.

       	           	    	      	       	      - Ted
-
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/
[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]
  Powered by Linux