To summarize, should we... A) Assume all kernels will be 3.8+ and use mount namespace (risky?) B) Do a check to ensure kernel is 3.8+ and fall back to net namespace and mount --bind if not (more work). C) Just use net namespace as indication that namespace with mount --bind done (simple)
Maybe it is best to just do the simple thing for now. I wanted to double check though, to see if the alternatives could/should be considered. Regards, PCM PCM (Paul Michali) IRC............ pc_m (irc.freenode.com) Twitter....... @pmichali On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 1:35 AM, Joshua Zhang <joshua.zh...@canonical.com> wrote: > pls note that actually this patch doesn't have minumum kernel requirement > because it only uses 'mount --bind' and 'net namespace', not use 'mount > namespace'. ('mount --bind' is since linux 2.4, 'net namespace' is since > Linux 3.0, 'mount namespace' is since Linux 3.8). > > so I think sanity checks for 3.8 is not need, any thoughts ? > > thanks. > > > On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 2:12 PM, Kevin Benton <blak...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >If we can consolidate that and use a single tool from the master neutron >> repository, that would be my vote. >> >> +1 with a hook mechanism so the sanity checks stay in the *aas repos and >> they are only run if installed. >> >>> >> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 7:30 AM, Kyle Mestery <mest...@mestery.com> >> wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 10:27 AM, Ihar Hrachyshka <ihrac...@redhat.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On 01/20/2015 05:40 PM, Paul Michali wrote: >>>> >>>> Review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/146508/ is adding support for >>>> StrongSwan VPN, which needs mount bind to be able to specify different >>>> paths for config files. >>>> >>>> The code, which used some older patch, does a test for >>>> /proc/1/ns/net, instead of /proc/1/ns/mnt, because it stated that the >>>> latter is only supported in kernel 3.8+. That was a while ago, and I'm >>>> wondering if the condition is still true. If we know that for Kilo and on, >>>> we'll be dealing with 3.8+ kernels, we could use the more accurate test. >>>> >>>> Can we require 3.8+ kernel for this? >>>> >>>> >>>> I think we can but it's better to check with distributions. Red Hat >>>> wise, we ship a kernel that is newer than 3.8. >>>> >>>> If so, how and where do we ensure that is true? >>>> >>>> >>>> Ideally, you would implement a sanity check for the feature you need >>>> from the kernel. Though it opens a question of whether we want to ship >>>> multiple sanity check tools for each of repos (neutron + 3 *aas repos). >>>> >>>> If we can consolidate that and use a single tool from the master >>> neutron repository, that would be my vote. >>> >>>> >>>> Also, if you can kindly review the code here: >>>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/146508/5/neutron_vpnaas/services/vpn/common/netns_wrapper.py, >>>> I'd really appreciate it, as I'm not versed in the Linux proc files at all. >>>> >>>> Thanks! >>>> >>>> >>>> PCM (Paul Michali) >>>> >>>> IRC............ pc_m (irc.freenode.com) >>>> Twitter....... @pmichali >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> __________________________________________________________________________ >>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >>>> Unsubscribe: >>>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribehttp://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> __________________________________________________________________________ >>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >>>> Unsubscribe: >>>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe >>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> __________________________________________________________________________ >>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >>> Unsubscribe: >>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe >>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Kevin Benton >> >> __________________________________________________________________________ >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> Unsubscribe: >> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> >> > > > -- > Best Regards > Zhang Hua(张华) > Software Engineer | Canonical > IRC: zhhuabj > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > >
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev