From: "J. Bruce Fields" Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/4] sunrpc: Use utsnamespaces Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 18:53:22 -0500 Message-ID: <20090106235322.GE13785@fieldses.org> References: <20090106011314.534653345@us.ibm.com> <20090106011314.961946803@us.ibm.com> <20090106200229.GA17031@us.ibm.com> <1231274682.20316.65.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> <20090106215831.GE18147@us.ibm.com> <1231283734.8041.6.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> <20090106233238.GD13785@fieldses.org> <1231284943.8041.8.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" , "Serge E. Hallyn" , Matt Helsley , Linux Containers , linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , Chuck Lever , Linux Containers , Cedric Le Goater To: Trond Myklebust Return-path: Received: from mail.fieldses.org ([141.211.133.115]:43272 "EHLO fieldses.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750978AbZAFXxb (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Jan 2009 18:53:31 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1231284943.8041.8.camel-rJ7iovZKK19ZJLDQqaL3InhyD016LWXt@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 06:35:43PM -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote: > On Tue, 2009-01-06 at 18:32 -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 06:15:34PM -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote: > > > On Tue, 2009-01-06 at 15:04 -0800, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > > > That implies to me you want to capture the value at mount time, and to > > > > pass it in to the rpc_call creation, and only at very specific well > > > > defined points where we interact with user space should we examine > > > > current->utsname(). At which point there should be no question > > > > of current->utsname() is valid as the user space process is alive. > > > > > > Why pretend that the filesystem is owned by a particular namespace? It > > > can, and will be shared among many containers... > > > > If the only purpose of this is to fill in the auth_unix cred then > > shouldn't it be part of whatever cred structures are passed around? > > So how does tracking it in a shared structure like the rpc_client help? > If you consider it to be part of the cred, then it needs to be tracked > in the cred... Right, that's what I meant. It seems like overkill, though. Does anyone actually care whether these names are right? --b.