On Fri, Mar 09, 2007 at 11:05:43PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > It is good to see these patches are starting to come together. > > Be patient a good review is going to take me a little bit. > > A couple of immediate things I see that would be nice to address before > we aim at merging these patches upstream. > > - Since there are known cases that we still need to convert to use > struct pid can we disable the clone/unshare unless we have the > CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL flag set. And a comment in Kconfig saying we > are almost but not quite there yet. With that in place I would have > no problems with the idea of merging all of the bits needed to have > multiple pid namespaces before we finish making the code pid namespace > safe. IMHO not the best idea, mainly because both OpenVZ and Linux-VServer will end up either duplicating the pid code or using the incomplete (broken) version which probably gives the pid space a bad start ... I'd prefer to focus on fixing up the existing pid issues (conversion) first, then hitting it with a hopefully working pid namespace ... YMMV > - When we do the rename can we please rename it task_proxy and have > the functions follow that naming. The resource limiting conversation > seems to be going in that direction, and it more general then what we > are using now. hmm, nsproxy was unusual but kind of understandable, task_proxy sounds just weird to me, I'd definitely prefer nsproxy over task_proxy, but I'm open for more 'space' related names too, like spaces or space_proxy or space_group ... best, Herbert > - At a first skim the patches didn't quite feel like they were > git-bisect safe. > I haven't looked closely enough to be certain yet. > > > Eric > _______________________________________________ > Containers mailing list > Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/containers _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
