Re: [PATCH 4/6] BC: user interface (syscalls)

[Kirill Korotaev <dev@sw.ru>]

Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 12:04:16PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > Ar Mer, 2006-08-23 am 21:35 -0700, ysgrifennodd Andrew Morton:
> >
> > > > Its a uid_t because of setluid() and twenty odd years of existing unix
> > > > practice.
> > >
> > > I don't understand.  This number is an identifier for an accounting
> > > container, which was somehow dreamed up by userspace.
> >
> > Which happens to be a uid_t. It could easily be anyother_t of itself and
> > you can create a container_id_t or whatever. It is just a number.
> >
> > The ancient Unix implementations of this kind of resource management and
> > security are built around setluid() which sets a uid value that cannot
> > be changed again and is normally used for security purposes. That
> > happened to be a uid_t and in simple setups at login uid = luid = euid
> > would be the norm.
> >
> > Thus the Linux one happens to be a uid_t. It could be something else but
> > for the "container per user" model whatever a container is must be able
> > to hold all possible uid_t values. So we can certainly do something like
> >
> > typedef uid_t	container_id_t;
>
>
> What about cid_t? Google mentions cid_t was used in HP-UX specific IPC (only if
> _INCLUDE_HPUX_SOURCE is defined).
bcid_t?

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