[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090111082522.GC7686@localhost>
Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 11:25:22 +0300
From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
To: Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>, davem@...emloft.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
devel@...nvz.org, xemul@...nvz.org
Cc: James Chapman <jchapman@...alix.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 4/4] net: ppp_generic - introduce net-namespace
functionality
[Cyrill Gorcunov - Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 10:46:52AM +0300]
| [Paul Mackerras - Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 11:33:21AM +1100]
| | Cyrill Gorcunov writes:
| |
| | > From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
| | > Subecjt: [RFC] net: ppp_generic - introduce net-namespace functionality
| | >
| | > - Each namespace contain ppp channels and units separately
| | > with appropriate locks
| |
| | This looks like a lot of uglification to me. Why exactly do
| | individual network drivers need to know or care about namespaces?
| |
| | Paul.
| |
|
| Unfortunately in the whole series ppp has been change more
| then others and it's looks ugly indeed that is why it was RFC.
| Namespaces imply isolation of data right? Including private
| data being 'user related' -- ie units passed to user in one
| namespace should not interfere with units passed to user in
| another namespace. So if I will not 'bind' units pool to
| namespaces it would be possible to steal unit from one namespace
| proposed for another namespace. Right?
|
| - Cyrill -
Anyway, thanks for review -- I'll check if I could make this
series less 'ugly'. I just wanna hear what people think about
this series 'in general' (or maybe even test it [James, thanks!] :) --
since the series is RFC and not to include in any kind of tree.
- Cyrill -
--
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