[Devel] Re: [PATCH 2/4] sysfs: Implement sysfs manged shadow directory support.

[Kirill Korotaev]

Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Kirill.
> 
> Kirill Korotaev wrote:
> 
>>Imho then OpenOVZ approach with multiple sysfs trees is better.
>>it allows to use cached dentries with moultiple sysfs mounts
>>each having different view.
>>It also allows to hide hw-related entries and events from the containers
>>and has quite little modifications in the code.
> 
> 
> I thought something like supermount plus some twists or fuse based sysfs
> proxy would fit better.  Dunno whether or how uevent and polling stuff
> can work that way tho.  Note that sysfs no longer keeps dentries and
> inodes pinned.  It might make the shared dentry stuff harder.

We simply don't share sysfs dentries/inodes between containers.
It's not that frequently used time critical fs to be super-optimized... :)
I don't like the idea with fuse, since sysfs exports kernel-related stuff,
so doing it via user-space would be pain.

Thanks,
Kirill
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers at lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers