Cedric Le Goater <clg@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> Cedric Le Goater wrote: >>>>> >>>> I suggest "newinstance", but "newns" works, too. >>> >>> Could we also use this mount option to 'unshare' a new posix message >>> queue namespace ? >> >> Sorry, I fail to see the connection with devpts here? Are you >> suggesting using the same option for another filesystem (if so, which)? > > yes. the posix message queues are also using a single superblock filesystem. > > If we want isolate them (for container needs for example), we also need to > create a new sb. The patchset I have uses a clone flag but using a mount > 'newns' really sounds like a better idea. Let's call it newinstance if we are going to use the same option for devpts. We can update "current->nsproxy->mqueuens" when the newinstance flag is passed and otherwise we can mount whatever is the current mqueue filesystem for the process. That should be simple and just work. Eric _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
