mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Herbert Poetzl <herbert@13thfloor.at>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Kirill Korotaev <dev@sw.ru>, Dave Hansen <haveblue@us.ibm.com>,
	Sam Vilain <sam@vilain.net>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	OpenVZ developers list <dev@openvz.org>,
	"Serge E.Hallyn" <serue@us.ibm.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH 0/7] Some basic vserver infrastructure
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 22:40:29 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060324214029.GD22308@MAIL.13thfloor.at> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m1u09nh7gb.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com>

On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 02:13:40PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Herbert Poetzl <herbert@13thfloor.at> writes:
> 
> > hmm, isn't per process a little extreme ... I know
> > what you want to accomplish but won't this lead to
> > a per process procfs? 
> 
> Where all of the values vary per process possibly, that
> is they way /proc is supposed to be.
> 
> /proc/sys is the only case that I think really gets extreme. For
> things like /proc/sysvipc and /proc/net it really is a natural break,
> and /proc/mounts already shows that the technique works fine.

well, while /proc/mounts is a good example that it 'works'
it isn't a good example for proper design, as the entire
private namespaces lead to much obfuscation, and having
the mounts per process, where they actually should be per
namespace, and to hide the fact that there are different
namespaces does not help either ...

IMHO a much better design would be to have the namespace
'explicit' and link to that one, containig the mounts entry
btw, this is something which should still be possible
without breaking anything ...

> So I am trying to turn an ugly design choice into feature :)

hmm, no, you are trying to multipy an ugly design :)

> > and, if you want to do per
> > process procfs, what would be the gain?
> >
> > just my opinion ...
> 
> Under the covers the implementation is per namespace, but
> it isn't easy to export it that way from procfs.

why?

/proc/self -> YYY/
/proc/mounts -> self/mounts

(so far nothing new)

/proc/YYY/namespace -> ../namespace-XXX/
/proc/YYY/mounts -> namespace/mounts 

(or alternatively)

/proc/namespace -> namespace-XXX/
/proc/mounts -> namespace/mounts

> In any event this appears to be a way to implement these things while
> retaining backwards compatibility, with the current implementation,
> and it looks like it can be implemented fairly cleanly.

I don't see any differences regarding compatibility when
things like namespaces get explicit ...

best,
Herbert

> Eric

  reply	other threads:[~2006-03-24 21:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20060321061333.27638.63963.stgit@localhost.localdomain>
2006-03-21 18:50 ` Dave Hansen
2006-03-21 21:08   ` Sam Vilain
2006-03-21 21:32     ` Dave Hansen
2006-03-21 23:12       ` Sam Vilain
2006-03-22  5:18         ` Sam Vilain
2006-03-22  7:13         ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-03-23  4:17           ` Sam Vilain
2006-03-24 15:36           ` [Devel] " Kirill Korotaev
2006-03-27 12:45             ` Serge E. Hallyn
2006-03-28  5:28               ` Sam Vilain
2006-03-29 12:07               ` Kirill Korotaev
2006-03-29 13:47                 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2006-03-29 21:30                   ` Sam Vilain
2006-04-19  7:50                     ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-04-19 21:42                       ` Sam Vilain
2006-03-22  6:41   ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-03-23  4:29     ` Sam Vilain
2006-03-23  4:50       ` Andrew Morton
2006-03-24 15:38       ` Kirill Korotaev
2006-03-24 15:37     ` Kirill Korotaev
2006-03-24 20:28       ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-03-24 21:01         ` Herbert Poetzl
2006-03-24 21:13           ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-03-24 21:40             ` Herbert Poetzl [this message]
2006-03-24 22:30               ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-03-25 18:37                 ` Eric W. Biederman
     [not found] ` <20060321061333.27638.9112.stgit@localhost.localdomain>
2006-03-21 18:53   ` [RFC] [PATCH 1/7] Add process virtualisation umbrella structure (vx_info) Dave Hansen
2006-03-21 21:52     ` Sam Vilain
2006-03-22  2:02     ` Herbert Poetzl

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20060324214029.GD22308@MAIL.13thfloor.at \
    --to=herbert@13thfloor.at \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=dev@openvz.org \
    --cc=dev@sw.ru \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=haveblue@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sam@vilain.net \
    --cc=serue@us.ibm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

Powered by JetHome