Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 09:08:25 -0700
From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Rob Landley <rob@landley.net>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Kay Sievers <kay@vrfy.org>,
        Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] driver core: add uid and gid to devtmpfs
Message-ID: <20130411160825.GA24536@kroah.com>
References: <20130408182527.GB12889@kroah.com>
 <1365520315.18069.56@driftwood>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1365520315.18069.56@driftwood>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1358
Lines: 34

On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 10:11:55AM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> 
> Or do you think it will simply never cause a problem, so there's no
> need to worry?

Based on the limited number of drivers that will be using this
interface, I don't think there's any need to worry.  But I will be glad
to revisit this in the future if needed.

> >> Or is this because containers allow UID/GID to be redefined, and
> >> thus imposing magic values on userspace can now be mapped away or
> >> something?
> >
> >I don't understand, what do you mean by this?
> 
> I mean that each container can have its own UID/GID namespace now, I
> was wondering if a driver claims a UID that an existing root
> filsystem is already using for something else, can a container remap
> it away so it doesn't conflict? Or will it still need manual udev
> rules to adjust at hotplug time?

I don't know how containers deal with the userspace major/minor device
nodes today at all, so I can't answer that.  But see the review comments
from Eric that he sent, I'll make the needed changes based on that so
all should be ok after that.

thanks,

greg k-h
--
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/