[PATCH 0/13] Pid namespaces (OpenVZ view)

[Daniel Lezcano]

Pavel Emelianov wrote:
> Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>   
>> Pavel Emelianov wrote:
>>     
>>> Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>>  
>>>       
>>>> Pavel Emelianov <xemul at openvz.org> writes:
>>>>
>>>>    
>>>>         
>>>>> That's how OpenVZ sees the pid namespaces.
>>>>>
>>>>> The main idea is that kernel keeps operating with tasks pid
>>>>> as it did before, but each task obtains one more pid for each
>>>>> pid type - the virtual pid. When putting the pid to user or
>>>>> getting the pid from it kernel operates with the virtual ones.
>>>>>       
>>>>>           
>>>> Just a quick reaction.
>>>> - I would very much like to see a minimum of 3 levels of pids,
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> Why not 4? From my part, I would like to know, why such nesting
>>> is important. We have plain IPC namespaces and nobody cares.
>>> We will have isolated network namespaces, why pids are exception?
>>>   
>>>       
>> Pavel,
>>
>> I am taking advantage to the opportunity to ask you if you plan to send
>> a new network namespace patchset ?
>>     
>
> Unfortunately no :( Right now we're focusing on pids and
> resource management.
>   
Yep, a big part :)

Did you, OpenVZ guys, had time to look at Eric's patchset ?