Dave Hansen <[email protected]> writes:
> On Wed, 2005-12-07 at 15:17 -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> But beyond that a general test to see if you have done a good
>> job of virtualizing something is to see if you can recurse.
>
> I admit it would be interesting at the very least. But, using that
> definition, we haven't done any good virtualization in Linux that I can
> think of. Besides some vague ranting I heard about zSeries (the real
> IBM mainframes) I can't think of anything that does this today.
>
> I don think any of Solaris containers, ppc64 LPARs, Xen, UML, or
> vservers can recurse.
>
> Can you think of any?
There is Xnest that allows X to run on X.
There are process groups and sessions that while they may
not strictly nest you don't loose the ability to create new
ones.
There is the CLONE_NEWNS and just about any of the other
clone flags in linux.
There is bochs that emulates the whole machine.
I am actually a little surprised that UML can't run UML. I
suspect it is an address space conflict and not something fundamental.
With pidspaces as long as the parent isn't required to send
signals to arbitrary children I don't think nesting pids spaces
is hard. Or more properly have a process in one pidspace be
the parent of a process in another. Although I grant there
are a few boundary issues, that have to be handled carefully.
Eric
-
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]
