Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 11 Apr 2008 00:13:00 +0200 (CEST) | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/3] change clone_flags type to u64 | From | "Daniel Hokka Zakrisson" <> |
| |
Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > Quoting Andi Kleen (andi@firstfloor.org): >> > I guess that was a development rationale. >> >> But what rationale? It just doesn't make much sense to me. >> >> > Most of the namespaces are in >> > use in the container projects like openvz, vserver and probably others >> > and we needed a way to activate the code. >> >> You could just have added it to feature groups over time. >> >> > >> > Not perfect I agree. >> > >> > > With your current strategy are you sure that even 64bit will >> > > be enough in the end? For me it rather looks like you'll >> > > go through those quickly too as more and more of the kernel >> > > is namespaced. >> > >> > well, we're reaching the end. I hope ! devpts is in progress and >> > mq is just waiting for a clone flag. >> >> Are you sure? > > Well for one thing we can take a somewhat different approach to new > clone flags. I.e. we could extend CLONE_NEWIPC to do mq instead of > introducing a new clone flag. The name doesn't have 'sysv' in it, > and globbing all ipc resources together makes some amount of sense. > Similarly has hpa+eric pointed out earlier, suka could use > CLONE_NEWDEV for ptys. If we have net, pid, ipc, devices, that's a > pretty reasonable split imo. Perhaps we tie user to devices and get > rid of CLONE_NEWUSER which I suspect noone is using atm (since only > Dave has run into the CONFIG_USER_SCHED problem). Or not. We could > roll uts into net, and give CLONE_NEWUTS a deprecation period.
Please don't. Then we'd need to re-add it in Linux-VServer to support guests where network namespaces aren't used...
> -serge
-- Daniel Hokka Zakrisson
| |