linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] change clone

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]

Message-ID: <20080410224947.GA8346@sergelap.austin.ibm.com>
Date:	Thu, 10 Apr 2008 17:49:47 -0500
From:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
To:	Daniel Hokka Zakrisson <daniel@...ac.com>
Cc:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	"David C. Hansen" <haveblue@...ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Cedric Le Goater <clg@...ibm.com>,
	Containers <containers@...ts.osdl.org>,
	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] change clone_flags type to u64

Quoting Daniel Hokka Zakrisson (daniel@...ac.com):
> Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > Quoting Andi Kleen (andi@...stfloor.org):
> >> > I guess that was a development rationale.
> >>
> >> But what rationale? It just doesn't make much sense to me.
> >>
> >> > Most of the namespaces are in
> >> > use in the container projects like openvz, vserver and probably others
> >> > and we needed a way to activate the code.
> >>
> >> You could just have added it to feature groups over time.
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Not perfect I agree.
> >> >
> >> > > With your current strategy are you sure that even 64bit will
> >> > > be enough in the end? For me it rather looks like you'll
> >> > > go through those quickly too as more and more of the kernel
> >> > > is namespaced.
> >> >
> >> > well, we're reaching the end. I hope ! devpts is in progress and
> >> > mq is just waiting for a clone flag.
> >>
> >> Are you sure?
> >
> > Well for one thing we can take a somewhat different approach to new
> > clone flags.  I.e. we could extend CLONE_NEWIPC to do mq instead of
> > introducing a new clone flag.  The name doesn't have 'sysv' in it,
> > and globbing all ipc resources together makes some amount of sense.
> > Similarly has hpa+eric pointed out earlier, suka could use
> > CLONE_NEWDEV for ptys.  If we have net, pid, ipc, devices, that's a
> > pretty reasonable split imo.  Perhaps we tie user to devices and get
> > rid of CLONE_NEWUSER which I suspect noone is using atm (since only
> > Dave has run into the CONFIG_USER_SCHED problem).  Or not.  We could
> > roll uts into net, and give CLONE_NEWUTS a deprecation period.
> 
> Please don't. Then we'd need to re-add it in Linux-VServer to support
> guests where network namespaces aren't used...

So these are networked vservers with a different hostname?  Just
curious, what would be a typical use for these?

Anyway then I guess we won't :)  Do you have other suggestions for
ns clone flags which ought to be combined?  Do the rest of what I
listed make sense to you?  (If not, then I guess I'll step out of the
way and let you and Andi fight it out :)

thanks,
-serge
--
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/