From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Al Viro Subject: Re: Per-instance devpts Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2008 20:35:05 +0100 Message-ID: <20080801193505.GS28946@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20080412172933.GA19295@us.ibm.com> <1208027215.28187.17.camel@x61.ebiederm.org> <48935205.3090807@zytor.com> <1217618624.20260.50.camel@nimitz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1217618624.20260.50.camel@nimitz> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Dave Hansen Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" , "Eric W. Biederman" , Greg KH , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Containers , Alan Cox , Pavel Emelyanov List-Id: containers.vger.kernel.org On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 12:23:44PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: > On Fri, 2008-08-01 at 11:12 -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > 1. /dev/ptmx would have to change to a symlink, ptmx -> pts/ptmx. > ... > > I worry #1 would have substantial user-space impact, but I don't see a > > way around it, since there would be no obvious way to associate > > /dev/ptmx with a filesystem. > > Are your worries just about replacing what is now a normal file with a > symlink, and the behavioral changes that come with that? > > I wonder if using a bind mount for the file would be more robust. We > wouldn't, of course, be able to do it persistently, but I bet it would > be something we could count on udev to do for us. Not on my boxen. However, devpts tends to be mounted by initscripts, which is where one would naturally do that.