linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] Generic container system

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <6599ad830610041449v5dfd9ef3r4fb1e3453a8e6144@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 4 Oct 2006 14:49:30 -0700
From:	"Paul Menage" <menage@...gle.com>
To:	sekharan@...ibm.com
Cc:	pj@....com, akpm@...l.org, ckrm-tech@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, winget@...gle.com, mbligh@...gle.com,
	rohitseth@...gle.com, jlan@....com, Joel.Becker@...cle.com,
	Simon.Derr@...l.net
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] Generic container system

On 10/4/06, Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> > > > - Tight coupling of subsystems: I like your idea (you mentioned in a
> > > >   reply to the previous thread) of having an array of containers in task
> > > >   structure than the current implementation.
> > >

...

BTW, that's not to say that having parallel hierarchies of containers
is necessarily a bad thing - I can imagine just mounting multiple
instances of containerfs, each managing one of the container pointers
in task_struct - but I think that could be added on afterwards. Even
if we did have the parallel support, we'd still need to support
multiple subsystems/controllers on the same hierarchy, since I think
that's going to be the much more common case.

Paul
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/