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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2007 16:42:05 -0800 From: "Paul Menage" <menage@...gle.com> To: "Sam Vilain" <sam@...ain.net> Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>, "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>, "Srivatsa Vaddagiri" <vatsa@...ibm.com>, 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, Sam Vilain <sam@...ain.net> wrote: > Paul Menage wrote: > >> In the namespace world when we say container we mean roughly at the level > >> of nsproxy and container_group. > >> > > So you're saying that a task can only be in a single system-wide container. > > > > Nope, we didn't make the mistake of nailing down what a "container" was > too far before it is implemented. We talked before about > containers-within-containers because, inevitably if you provide a > feature you'll end up having to deal with virtualising systems that in > turn use that feature. Sure, my aproach allows containers hierarchically as children of other containers too. > > > My patch provides multiple potentially-independent ways of dividing up > > the tasks on the system - if the "container" is the set of all > > divisions that the process is in, what's an appropriate term for the > > sub-units? > > > > namespace, since 2.4.x > > > That assumes the viewpoint that your terminology is "correct" and > > other people's needs "fixing". :-) > > > > Absolutely. Please respect the semantics established so far; changing > them adds nothing at the cost of much confusion. But "namespace" has well-established historical semantics too - a way of changing the mappings of local names to global objects. This doesn't describe things liek resource controllers, cpusets, resource monitoring, etc. Trying to extend the well-known term namespace to refer to things that aren't namespaces isn't a useful approach, IMO. 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists