Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/5] utsname namespaces: sysctl hack | From | Dave Hansen <> | Date | Wed, 19 Apr 2006 10:19:18 -0700 |
| |
On Wed, 2006-04-19 at 10:52 -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Dave Hansen <haveblue@us.ibm.com> writes: > > > Besides ipc and utsnames, can anybody think of some other things in > > sysctl that we really need to virtualize? > > All of the networking entries. ... > Only in that you attacked the wrong piece of the puzzle. > The strategy table entries simply need to die, or be rewritten > to use the appropriate proc entries.
If we are limited to ipc, utsname, and network, I'd be worried trying to justify _too_ much infrastructure. The network namespaces are not going to be solved any time soon. Why not have something like this which is a quite simple, understandable, minor hack?
> The proc entries are the real interface, and the two pieces > don't share an implementation unfortunately.
You're saying that the proc interface doesn't use the ->strategy entry? That isn't what I remember, but I could be completely wrong.
-- Dave
- 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/
| |