[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8760kbg5ga.fsf@xmission.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 22:37:41 +1300
From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Djalal Harouni <tixxdz@...il.com>
Cc: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>, Chris Mason <clm@...com>,
Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@...onical.com>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
Dongsu Park <dongsu@...ocode.com>,
David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@...glemail.com>,
Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...hat.com>,
Alban Crequy <alban.crequy@...il.com>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>, Phil Estes <estesp@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/1] shiftfs: uid/gid shifting bind mount
Djalal Harouni <tixxdz@...il.com> writes:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Eric W. Biederman
> <ebiederm@...ssion.com> wrote:
>> James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com> writes:
>>> So is this. Basically anything that begins by mounting gets a super
>>> block and can use the s_user_ns to map from the filesystem view to the
>>> kernel view of ids. Apart from greater sophistication in the
>>> parametrisation, it sounds like we have all the machinery you need.
>>> I'm sure the containers people will consider reasonable patches to
>>> change this.
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>> And to be clear we have all of that merged now and mostly present and
>> hooked up in all filesystems without any shiftfs like changes needed.
>>
>> To use this with a filesystem a last pass needs to be had to verify that
>> the cases where something does not map are handled cleanly.
>
> Still this does not answer the question how to dynamically
> *attach/share* data or read-only volumes as defined by
> orchestration/container tools into several containers. Am I missing
> something or is the plan to have per superblock mount for each one ?
Agreed. That is a related problem and the problem that shiftfs
is working to solve.
If you only need a single mapping the infrastructure is basically done
in the kernel today. If you need multiple mappings we need something
more.
Eric
Powered by blists - more mailing lists