Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 19 Apr 2006 15:24:14 -0500 | From | "Serge E. Hallyn" <> | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/5] utsname namespaces: sysctl hack |
| |
Quoting Eric W. Biederman (ebiederm@xmission.com): > "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@us.ibm.com> writes: > > > Quoting Eric W. Biederman (ebiederm@xmission.com): > >> Kirill Korotaev <dev@sw.ru> writes: > >> > >> > Serge, > >> > > >> > can we do nothing with sysctls at this moment, instead of commiting hacks? > >> > >> Except that we modify a static table changing the uts behaviour in > >> proc_doutsstring isn't all that bad. > >> > >> I'm just about to start on something more comprehensive, in > >> the sysctl case. > > > > So assuming that I take out the switch(), leaving that for a better > > solution by Eric (or Dave, or whoever), > > > > Is it time to ask for the utsname namespace patch to be tried out > > in -mm? > > Can we please suggest a syscall interface?
We can, but I was hoping that would be a separate patch, separate discussion.
Are you asking for a new syscall, specifically to unshare utsname()? Or for discussion over whether we want to do one syscall per namespace extend CLONE_NEWns flags use unshare use namespacefs
-serge - 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/
| |