Eric W. Biederman wrote: > 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. ok. > 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. yes. I'll rebase my previous patchset on this idea. thanks, C. > That should be simple and just work. > > Eric _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
