linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] resource control file 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 7 Mar 2007 09:46:35 -0800
From:	"Paul Menage" <menage@...gle.com>
To:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
Cc:	"Srivatsa Vaddagiri" <vatsa@...ibm.com>, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
	sam@...ain.net, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, pj@....com, dev@...ru,
	xemul@...ru, containers@...ts.osdl.org, winget@...gle.com,
	ckrm-tech@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] resource control file system - aka containers on top of nsproxy!

On 3/7/07, Serge E. Hallyn <serue@...ibm.com> wrote:
> Quoting Srivatsa Vaddagiri (vatsa@...ibm.com):
> > On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 06:32:07PM -0800, Paul Menage wrote:
> > > I'm not really sure that I see the value of having this be part of
> > > nsproxy rather than the previous independent container (and
> > > container_group) structure.
> >
> > *shrug*
> >
> > I wrote the patch mainly to see whether the stuff container folks (Sam Vilain
> > et al) were complaining abt (that container structure abstraction
> > inside the kernel is redundant/unnecessary) made sense or not.
>
> I still think the complaint was about terminology, not implementation.

No, Sam was saying that nsproxy should be the object that all resource
controllers hook off.

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/