Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Kirill.
> Kirill Korotaev wrote:
>>Imho then OpenOVZ approach with multiple sysfs trees is better.
>>it allows to use cached dentries with moultiple sysfs mounts
>>each having different view.
>>It also allows to hide hw-related entries and events from the containers
>>and has quite little modifications in the code.
> I thought something like supermount plus some twists or fuse based sysfs
> proxy would fit better. Dunno whether or how uevent and polling stuff
> can work that way tho. Note that sysfs no longer keeps dentries and
> inodes pinned. It might make the shared dentry stuff harder.
We simply don't share sysfs dentries/inodes between containers.
It's not that frequently used time critical fs to be super-optimized... :)
I don't like the idea with fuse, since sysfs exports kernel-related stuff,
so doing it via user-space would be pain.
Containers mailing list