[Devel] Re: [PATCH] [RFC] c/r: Add UTS support

[Daniel Lezcano]

Dan Smith wrote:
> DL> I guess it will be esay to implement with a nsproxy level counter.
> DL> Each time you unshare, the new nsproxy count is incremented.
> DL> Assuming the init_nsproxy is level 0, when the nsproxy counter is
> DL> > 1, the process is uncheckpointable.
>
> This should also be possible by just making sure that the nsproxy of
> the root process being checkpointed is the same as any of the
> children, correct?  That way we avoid having to modify the core
> nsproxy bits and can still reject any nested namespaces.
>   
Right, this is another option. The nsproxy counter will allow to flag at 
runtime a process to be uncheckpointable. The nsproxy comparison will 
detect nested nsproxies at checkpoint time.
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers at lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers