Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 19 Apr 2006 18:54:09 +0200 | From | Cedric Le Goater <> | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/5] utsname namespaces: sysctl hack |
| |
Hello !
Kirill Korotaev wrote: > Serge, > >> Please look closer at the patch. >> I *am* doing nothing with sysctls. >> >> system_utsname no longer exists, and the way to get to that is by using >> init_uts_ns.name. That's all this does. > Sorry for being not concrete enough. > I mean switch () in the code. Until we decided how to virtualize > sysctls/proc, I believe no dead code/hacks should be commited. IMHO.
How could we improve that hack ? Removing the modification of the static table can easily be worked around but getting rid of the switch() statement is more difficult. Any idea ?
> FYI, I strongly object against virtualizing sysctls this way as it is > not flexible and is a real hack from my POV.
what is the issue with flexibility ?
thanks,
C. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |