Re: [PATCH 1/2] namespaces: introduce sys_hijack (v10)

2007-11-30 Thread Eric W. Biederman
"Serge E. Hallyn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Quoting Eric W. Biederman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): >> Mark Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> > Hi Paul and Eric, >> > >> > Do you guys have any objections to dropping the hijack_pid() and >> > hijack_cgroup() parts of sys_hijack, leaving just hij

Re: [PATCH 1/2] namespaces: introduce sys_hijack (v10)

2007-11-30 Thread Serge E. Hallyn
Quoting Eric W. Biederman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > Mark Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Hi Paul and Eric, > > > > Do you guys have any objections to dropping the hijack_pid() and > > hijack_cgroup() parts of sys_hijack, leaving just hijack_ns() (see > > below for discussion)? > > I need to

Re: [PATCH 1/2] namespaces: introduce sys_hijack (v10)

2007-11-30 Thread Serge E. Hallyn
Quoting Paul Menage ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > On Nov 29, 2007 6:08 PM, Mark Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Paul and Eric, > > > > Do you guys have any objections to dropping the hijack_pid() and > > hijack_cgroup() parts of sys_hijack, leaving just hijack_ns() (see > > below for discussion)?

Re: [PATCH 1/2] namespaces: introduce sys_hijack (v10)

2007-11-29 Thread Eric W. Biederman
Mark Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hi Paul and Eric, > > Do you guys have any objections to dropping the hijack_pid() and > hijack_cgroup() parts of sys_hijack, leaving just hijack_ns() (see > below for discussion)? I need to step back and study what is being proposed. My gut feeling is t

Re: [PATCH 1/2] namespaces: introduce sys_hijack (v10)

2007-11-29 Thread Mark Nelson
Hi Paul and Eric, Do you guys have any objections to dropping the hijack_pid() and hijack_cgroup() parts of sys_hijack, leaving just hijack_ns() (see below for discussion)? Thanks! Mark. Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > Quoting Stephen Smalley ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): >> On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 16:38 -0600,

Re: [PATCH 1/2] namespaces: introduce sys_hijack (v10)

2007-11-29 Thread Paul Menage
On Nov 29, 2007 6:08 PM, Mark Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Paul and Eric, > > Do you guys have any objections to dropping the hijack_pid() and > hijack_cgroup() parts of sys_hijack, leaving just hijack_ns() (see > below for discussion)? > hijack_ns() is the main bit that I care about any

Re: [PATCH 1/2] namespaces: introduce sys_hijack (v10)

2007-11-28 Thread Serge E. Hallyn
Quoting Stephen Smalley ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 16:38 -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > > Quoting Stephen Smalley ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > > On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 10:11 -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > > > > Quoting Crispin Cowan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > > > > Just the name "sys_h

Re: [PATCH 1/2] namespaces: introduce sys_hijack (v10)

2007-11-28 Thread Stephen Smalley
On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 16:38 -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > Quoting Stephen Smalley ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 10:11 -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > > > Quoting Crispin Cowan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > > > Just the name "sys_hijack" makes me concerned. > > > > > > > > This post d

Re: [PATCH 1/2] namespaces: introduce sys_hijack (v10)

2007-11-28 Thread Serge E. Hallyn
Quoting Casey Schaufler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > --- "Serge E. Hallyn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Quoting Stephen Smalley ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > > On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 10:11 -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > > > > Quoting Crispin Cowan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > > > > Just the name "sys_hija

Re: [PATCH 1/2] namespaces: introduce sys_hijack (v10)

2007-11-27 Thread Casey Schaufler
--- "Serge E. Hallyn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Quoting Stephen Smalley ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 10:11 -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > > > Quoting Crispin Cowan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > > > Just the name "sys_hijack" makes me concerned. > > > > > > > > This post describe

Re: [PATCH 1/2] namespaces: introduce sys_hijack (v10)

2007-11-27 Thread Serge E. Hallyn
Quoting Stephen Smalley ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 10:11 -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > > Quoting Crispin Cowan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > > Just the name "sys_hijack" makes me concerned. > > > > > > This post describes a bunch of "what", but doesn't tell us about "why" > > > we w

Re: [PATCH 1/2] namespaces: introduce sys_hijack (v10)

2007-11-27 Thread Stephen Smalley
On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 10:11 -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > Quoting Crispin Cowan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > Just the name "sys_hijack" makes me concerned. > > > > This post describes a bunch of "what", but doesn't tell us about "why" > > we would want this. What is it for? > > Please see my respon

Re: [PATCH 1/2] namespaces: introduce sys_hijack (v10)

2007-11-27 Thread Serge E. Hallyn
on wrote: > > Here's the latest version of sys_hijack. > > Apologies for its lateness. > > > > Thanks! > > > > Mark. > > > > Subject: [PATCH 1/2] namespaces: introduce sys_hijack (v10) > > > > Move most of do_fork() into a new do_fork_task()

Re: [PATCH 1/2] namespaces: introduce sys_hijack (v10)

2007-11-26 Thread Crispin Cowan
; a process. Crispin Mark Nelson wrote: > Here's the latest version of sys_hijack. > Apologies for its lateness. > > Thanks! > > Mark. > > Subject: [PATCH 1/2] namespaces: introduce sys_hijack (v10) > > Move most of do_fork() into a new do_fork_task() which a

[PATCH 1/2] namespaces: introduce sys_hijack (v10)

2007-11-26 Thread Mark Nelson
Here's the latest version of sys_hijack. Apologies for its lateness. Thanks! Mark. Subject: [PATCH 1/2] namespaces: introduce sys_hijack (v10) Move most of do_fork() into a new do_fork_task() which acts on a new argument, task, rather than on current. do_fork() becomes a call to do_fork