RFC: Device Namespaces

Janne Karhunen janne.karhunen at gmail.com
Wed Sep 25 11:05:32 UTC 2013


On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Amir Goldstein <amir at cellrox.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 2:51 AM, Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm at xmission.com>wrote:
>
>> Amir Goldstein <amir at cellrox.com> writes:
>>
>> > On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 7:50 PM, Eric W. Biederman
>> > <ebiederm at xmission.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi Eric,
>> >
>> > If we can get people to take a quick look at the code before LPC
>> > that could make the LPC discussions more effective.

Hi,

I think we are curious enough to experiment with Erics idea of
implementing basic 'device namespace' in userspace (never miss an
opportunity to throw away kernel code). Can anyone point out any
obvious reason why this would not work if we consider bulk of the work
being plain access filtering?

That being said, is there a valid reason why binder is part of device
namespace here instead of IPC?


-- 
Janne


More information about the Containers mailing list