Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: device namespaces | From | Hannes Reinecke <> | Date | Wed, 9 Jun 2021 09:02:36 +0200 |
| |
On 6/9/21 8:38 AM, Christian Brauner wrote: > On Tue, Jun 08, 2021 at 12:16:43PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de> writes: >> >>> On 6/8/21 4:29 PM, Christian Brauner wrote: >>>> On Tue, Jun 08, 2021 at 04:10:08PM +0200, Hannes Reinecke wrote: [ .. ] >>> Granted, modifying sysfs layout is not something for the faint-hearted, >>> and one really has to look closely to ensure you end up with a >>> consistent layout afterwards. >>> >>> But let's see how things go; might well be that it turns out to be too >>> complex to consider. Can't tell yet. >> >> I would suggest aiming for something like devptsfs without the >> complication of /dev/ptmx. >> >> That is a pseudo filesystem that has a control node and virtual block >> devices that were created using that control node. > > Also see android/binder/binderfs.c > Ah. Will have a look.
>> >> That is the cleanest solution I know and is not strictly limited to use >> with containers so it can also gain greater traction. The interaction >> with devtmpfs should be simply having devtmpfs create a mount point for >> that filesystem. >> >> This could be a new cleaner api for things like loopback devices. > > I sent a patchset that implemented this last year. > Do you have a pointer/commit hash for this?
Cheers,
Hannes -- Dr. Hannes Reinecke Kernel Storage Architect hare@suse.de +49 911 74053 688 SUSE Software Solutions GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg HRB 36809 (AG Nürnberg), Geschäftsführer: Felix Imendörffer
| |