Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> clg@fr.ibm.com writes:
> 
>> From: Cedric Le Goater <clg@fr.ibm.com>
>>
>> This patch adds a hashtable of nsproxy using the nsproxy as a key.
>> init_nsproxy is hashed at init with key 0. This is considered to be
>> the 'host' nsproxy.
> 
> NAK.  Which namespace do these ids live in?
> 
> It sounds like you are setting up to make the 'host' nsproxy special
> and have special rules.  

exactly. 

> That also sounds wrong.

sounds very nice to me and a few others.

> Even letting the concept of nsproxy escape to user space sounds wrong.
> nsproxy is an internal space optimization.  It's not struct container
> and I don't think we want it to become that.

i don't agree here. we need that, so does openvz, vserver, people working
on resource management.

C.
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@lists.osdl.org
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/containers