[Devel] Re: [PATCH 4/4] net: Implement the per network namespace sysctl infrastructure
Serge E. Hallyn
serue at us.ibm.com
Fri Nov 30 16:01:50 PST 2007
Quoting Eric W. Biederman (ebiederm at xmission.com):
> "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue at us.ibm.com> writes:
>
> >
> > Hey Eric,
> >
> > the patches look nice.
> >
> > The hand-forcing of the passed-in net_ns into a copy of current->nsproxy
> > does make it seem like nsproxy may not be the best choice of what to
> > pass in. Doesn't only net_sysctl_root->lookup() look at the argument?
>
> Yes. Although I call it from __register_sysctl_paths.
>
> > But I assume you don't want to be more general than sending in a
> > nsproxy so as to dissuade abuse of this interface for needlessly complex
> > sysctl interfaces?
>
> A bit of that. I would love to pass in a task_struct so you can use
> anything from a task. The trouble is I don't have any task_structs or
> nsproxys with the proper value at the point where I am first setting
> this up. Further I have to have the full sysctl lookup working or I
> could not call sysctl_check.
>
> > (Well I expect that'll become clear once the the patches using this
> > come out.)
> >
> > Are you planning to use this infrastructure for the uts and ipc
> > sysctls as well?
>
> Yes. Where it comes in especially useful, is I can move /proc/sys
> to /proc/sys/<tgid>/task/<pid>/sys. And get a particular processes
> view of sysctl.
>
> We also get a little more reuse of common functions.
>
> Otherwise Pavel does have a point that using this for uts and ipc
> is not a savings lines of code wise.
>
> After having seen Pavel changes I am asking myself if there is a sane
> way to remove the ctl_name argument from the ctl_path.
>
> Anyway where I am with the nsproxy question was that I don't
> see anything easily better. What I have works and gets the job
> done, and doesn't have any module unload races or holes where a sloppy
> programmer can mess up the sysctl tree. We needed a solution.
> Trying any harder to find something better would take ages. So
> I figured this implementation was good enough.
I agree. So it's already in -mm but still
Acked-by: Serge Hallyn <serue at us.ibm.com>
thanks,
-serge
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers at lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
More information about the Devel
mailing list