Daniel Lezcano wrote: > Dan Smith wrote: >> NL> I'd like there to be some discussion about this, because namespace >> NL> creation seems like a significant addition to the semantics of >> NL> restart as I understand it. >> >> Indeed. >> >> NL> Is namespace creation during restart unavoidable, or merely >> NL> desirable? Is there a case for requiring the user to provide a >> NL> suitable namespace environment before attempting restart? >> >> Information about the namespaces has to be saved at checkpoint time no >> matter what, right? I guess I don't see any compelling reason to not >> have the restart operation replicate the environment of the original >> process. Otherwise we require userspace to read and interpret the >> checkpoint stream and selectively feed the bits that the kernel is >> responsible for to the kernel and process the rest itself (or have the >> kernel ignore those records). >> > > Assuming you have a process and this one unshared the network 100 times > and each time opens a socket, how do you checkpoint these namespaces ? > >> What's the argument for depending on userspace to set this up? >> > Maybe, CR of the namespaces is more complicate topic than it looks like s/Maybe/Surely/ ... > and the CR itself is big enough to not complicate things. IMHO, I would > recommend as the first step to forbid the unshare inside a container and > let the container implementation to save the configuration with the > statefile in order to recreate it at the restart > Agreed. Oren. _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers