netdev - Re: [RFC][PATCH] ns: Syscalls for better namespace sharing control.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4B883E6F.1060907@parallels.com>
Date:	Sat, 27 Feb 2010 00:34:39 +0300
From:	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>
To:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
CC:	hadi@...erus.ca, Daniel Lezcano <dlezcano@...ibm.com>,
	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>,
	Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	Netfilter Development Mailinglist 
	<netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>,
	Serge Hallyn <serue@...ibm.com>,
	Matt Helsley <matthltc@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] ns: Syscalls for better namespace sharing control.

>> Yet another set of per-namespace IDs along with CLONE_NEWXXX ones?
>> I currently have a way to create all namespaces we have with one
>> syscall. Why don't we have an ability to enter them all with one syscall?
> 
> The CLONE_NEWXXX series of bits has been an royal pain to work with,
> and it appears to be unnecessary complications for no gain.

That's the answer for the "Yet another set..." question.
How about the "Why don't we have..." one?

> Eric
> 
> 

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html