Re: Controlling devices and device namespaces

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Serge Hallyn <serge@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

>>> That's what I said a few emails ago :)  The device cgroup was meant as
>>> a short-term workaround for lack of user (and device) namespaces.
>>
>> I am saying something stronger.  The device cgroup doesn't seem to have
>> a practical function now.
>
> "Now" is wrong.  The user namespace is not complete and not yet usable for a
> full system container.  We still need the device control group.

Dropping cap mknod, and not having any device nodes you can mount
a filesystem with device nodes, plus mount namespace work to only allow
you to have access to proper device nodes should work today.  And I
admit the user namespace as I have it coded in my tree does make this
simpler.

But I agree "Now" is too soon until we have actually demonstrated
something else.

Eric
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cgroups" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]     [Monitors]

  Powered by Linux