From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Herbert Poetzl <herbert@13thfloor.at>
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 14:13:40 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m1u09nh7gb.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060324210150.GA22308@MAIL.13thfloor.at> (Herbert Poetzl's message of "Fri, 24 Mar 2006 22:01:50 +0100")
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.
So I am trying to turn an ugly design choice into feature :)
> 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.
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.
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-03-24 21:16 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 [this message]
2006-03-24 21:40 ` Herbert Poetzl
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=m1u09nh7gb.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=dev@openvz.org \
--cc=dev@sw.ru \
--cc=haveblue@us.ibm.com \
--cc=herbert@13thfloor.at \
--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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®