[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <49E79D33.4010909@cs.columbia.edu>
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 17:03:47 -0400
From: Oren Laadan <orenl@...columbia.edu>
To: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
CC: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, xemul@...allels.com,
dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, mingo@...e.hu, hch@...radead.org,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 19/30] cr: deal with nsproxy
Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Alexey Dobriyan (adobriyan@...il.com):
>> To save nsproxy, or to not save nsproxy?
>>
>> Don't think much, save it.
>>
>> I argue that nsproxy should be removed totally, if someone thinks otherwise. ;-)
>
> You've got Oren starting to agree with you too. I personally don't
> much care in principle, and your code looks very nice.
Heh ... as a matter of fact I always agreed with him about that.
(and the irc logs can tell the story :)
In fact, we have much more in agreement than none. That's what
I have been arguing ! Now it's time to settle the disagreements...
Oren.
>
> The way you do this and the uts patch, though, you (of course) bypass
> the CAP_SYS_ADMIN check in copy_namespaces(). Which is fine for your
> patchset, but a problem if we were to base a compromise patchset on
> your patchset.
>
> It of course also enforces the 'leakage' checks, which again is
> subject to our whole-container c/r discussion.
>
> But again, the code is nice, and I see no problems in it.
>
> -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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists