Re: RFC: Device Namespaces

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Amir Goldstein <amir@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 2:51 AM, Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>
>> Amir Goldstein <amir@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>> > On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 7:50 PM, Eric W. Biederman
>> > <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi Eric,
>> >
>> > If we can get people to take a quick look at the code before LPC
>> > that could make the LPC discussions more effective.

Hi,

I think we are curious enough to experiment with Erics idea of
implementing basic 'device namespace' in userspace (never miss an
opportunity to throw away kernel code). Can anyone point out any
obvious reason why this would not work if we consider bulk of the work
being plain access filtering?

That being said, is there a valid reason why binder is part of device
namespace here instead of IPC?


-- 
Janne
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers




[Index of Archives]     [Cgroups]     [Netdev]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux