David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > From: ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Eric W. Biederman) > Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2016 19:02:01 -0500 > >> Which means this change gets has to wait for next cycle. > > Ok. For clarity I intend to merge these changes through the userns tree, when the issues are resolved. I Cc'd netdev as there is a limit on the number of network namespaces in this set which may be of interest to networking folks. I expect there will be some follow on about adding sanity checking limits to other kernel data structures like a maximum number of mounts in a mount namespace, and perhaps a maximum number of routes in a network namespace. User namespaces have enabled unprivileged users access to a lot more data structures and so to catch programs that go crazy we need a lot more limits. I believe some of those limits make sense per namespace. As it is easy in some cases to say any more than Y number of those per namespace is excessive. For example a limit of 1,000,000 ipv4 routes per network namespaces is a sanity check as there are currently 621,649 ipv4 prefixes advertized in bgp. But that is something to worry about after the merge window. Eric -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
