[lkml]   [2006]   [Feb]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation.
Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Herbert Poetzl (
>>>3) How do we refer to namespaces and containers when we are not members?
>>> - Do we refer to them indirectly by processes or other objects that
>>> we can see and are members?
>>the process will be an unique identifier to the
>>namespace, but it might not be easy to use it, so
>>IMHO it might at least make sense to ...
> Especially from userspace. If I want to start a checkpoint on a
> container, but I have to use the process to identify the
> container/namespace, well I can't uniquely specify the process by pid
> anymore...
> -serge

Well we first can agree that througout all processes/tasks of a container
the namespaces used are the same.
Hence looking at the init_task of each container is sufficient.

Restricting visibility to the default container makes sense to me,
because one is not supposed to be able to look into another container.

However, in the global context we do have pid that we can use.

-- Hubertus

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2006-02-08 15:53    [W:0.107 / U:0.700 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site