Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano at free.fr> writes: >> >> I agree with that and that is a worthy discussion. >> >> One of the reasons I'm not too concerned is that sys_ptrace completely >> solves that problem today. The syscall interface completely sucks for >> handling that case but it works. >> >> The one instance where we clearly need a way to talk about namespaces >> besides enter is for moving network interfaces between network >> namespaces and I haven't looked close yet but I don't think either >> Dmitry or Daniel in their network namespace patches was using this id. >> > > Well, I don't do that for the moment, but I was planning to use the namespace > id. To be very clear. - I completely agree we need an identifier for namespaces. So far my vision is one per namespace not one per nsproxy. - I believe the identifier should be in one of the namespaces, so we don't have problems with recursion. I want to be able to use things like the pam_namespace module in a guest. My suggestion is that we name our process groups in the traditional pid namespace. Then we can have a name for each process group in each namespace. For debugging I think this could be quite helpful if someone gets their reference counting wrong. Eric
