[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20071116084820.cc8ccd19.randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 08:48:20 -0800
From: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
To: Daniel Lezcano <dlezcano@...ibm.com>
Cc: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Cedric Le Goater <clg@...ibm.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Linux Containers <containers@...ts.osdl.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][DOCUMENTATION] The namespaces compatibility list doc
On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 16:52:34 +0100 Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> > +1. Both the IPC and the PID namespaces provide IDs to address
> > + object inside the kernel. E.g. semaphore with ipcid or
> > + process group with pid.
> > +
> > + In both cases, tasks shouldn't try exposing this id to some
> > + other task living in a different namespace via a shared filesystem
> > + or IPC shmem/message. The fact is that this ID is only valid
> > + within the namespace it was obtained in and may refer to some
> > + other object in another namespace.
> > +
> > +2. Intentionnaly, two equal user ids in different user namespaces
> Intentionaly
Intentionally,
> > + should not be equal from the VFS point of view. In other
> > + words, user 10 in one user namespace shouldn't have the same
> > + access permissions to files, beloging to user 10 in another
> belonging
> > + namespace. But currently this is not so.
> > +
---
~Randy
-
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