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

Daniel Lezcano daniel.lezcano at free.fr
Thu Mar 12 15:48:36 PDT 2009

Dan Smith wrote:
> NL> I'd like there to be some discussion about this, because namespace
> NL> creation seems like a significant addition to the semantics of
> NL> restart as I understand it.
> Indeed.
> NL> Is namespace creation during restart unavoidable, or merely
> NL> desirable?  Is there a case for requiring the user to provide a
> NL> suitable namespace environment before attempting restart?
> Information about the namespaces has to be saved at checkpoint time no
> matter what, right?  I guess I don't see any compelling reason to not
> have the restart operation replicate the environment of the original
> process.  Otherwise we require userspace to read and interpret the
> checkpoint stream and selectively feed the bits that the kernel is
> responsible for to the kernel and process the rest itself (or have the
> kernel ignore those records).

Assuming you have a process and this one unshared the network 100 times 
and each time opens a socket, how do you checkpoint these namespaces ?

> What's the argument for depending on userspace to set this up?
Maybe, CR of the namespaces is more complicate topic than it looks like 
and the CR itself is big enough to not complicate things. IMHO, I would 
recommend as the first step to forbid the unshare inside a container and 
let the container implementation to save the configuration with the 
statefile in order to recreate it at the restart

More information about the Containers mailing list