[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48935205.3090807@zytor.com>
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2008 11:12:21 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
CC: sukadev@...ibm.com, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
serue@...ibm.com, matthltc@...ibm.com,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>,
Containers <containers@...ts.osdl.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Subject: Per-instance devpts
Since the issue of PTY namespaces came up (and was rejected) back in
April, I have thought a little bit about changing ptys to be tied
directly into a devpts instance. devpts would then be a "normal"
filesystem, which can be mounted multiple times (or not at all). pty's
would then become private to a devpts instance.
This is what it would appear would have to change, and I'd like to get
people's feeing for the user-space impact:
1. /dev/ptmx would have to change to a symlink, ptmx -> pts/ptmx.
2. Permissions on /dev/ptmx would not be persistent, and would have to
be set via devpts mount options (unless they're 0666 root.tty, which
would presumably be the default.)
3. The /proc/sys/kernel/pty limit would be global; a per-filesystem
limit could be added on top or instead (presumably via a filesystem
mount options.)
I worry #1 would have substantial user-space impact, but I don't see a
way around it, since there would be no obvious way to associate
/dev/ptmx with a filesystem.
-hpa
--
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