[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160413185033.GH3676@htj.duckdns.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2016 14:50:33 -0400
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>
Cc: linux-api@...r.kernel.org, adityakali@...gle.com,
Linux Containers <containers@...ts.osdl.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] cgroup namespaces: add a 'nsroot=' mountinfo field
Hello, Serge.
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 01:46:39PM -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> It's not a leak of any information we're trying to hide. I realize
> something like 8 years have passed, but I still basically go by the
> ksummit guidance that containers are ok but the kernel's first priority
> is to facilitate containers but not trick containers into thinking
> they're not containerized. So long as the container is properly set
> up, I don't think there's anything the workload could do with the
> nsroot= info other than *know* that it is in a ns cgroup.
>
> If we did change that guidance, there's a slew of proc info that we
> could better virtualize :)
I see. I'm just wondering because the information here seems a bit
gratuituous. Isn't the only thing necessary telling whether the root
is bind mounted or namescoped? Wouldn't simple "nsroot" work for that
purpose?
Thanks.
--
tejun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists