[lkml]   [2011]   [Dec]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: chroot(2) and bind mounts as non-root
On Mon, 2011-12-19 at 01:22 -0800, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> "
> As long as Colin only cares about being able to be the root user I
> agree.

I don't actually need "pretend to be uid 0" functionality myself, but
the "fakeroot" case was cited on the user namespace page, and so I
wanted to understand how it works.

> If Colin needs several uids during his build that is trickier.
> But it sounds like Colin just needs to have a chroot build environment and
> for that a single user sounds good enough.

Right, just need chroot (and bind mounts).

> Being able to use the other namespaces to get a good isolation from the
> host environment is also nice and especially the pid namespace can
> guarantee that processes won't escape his build environment.

Yeah, CLONE_NEWPID is great.

> It is one of those worse is better implementation details but we can
> discuss that more when I start posting patches in January.
> I am not an immediate fan of writing random uids to disk. Uids being
> persistent can be interesting to deal with if those uids are ever
> reused.


> Right now my implementation supports just 5 non-overlapping uid mapping
> ranges. Which is enough to cover a lot of uids but still fit within one
> cacheline. And I think to keep stat reasonable fast I want at to fit in
> a cacheline at least for now. Oy. Hopefully it isn't too hard to find
> some benchmarks to prove this out. I expect the torture case is to
> time ls -l in a huge directory with a lot of files, owned by a lot of
> different users.

Where's the current user namespace tree? The link on is broken.

Is it:;a=summary


 \ /
  Last update: 2011-12-20 17:53    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans