From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ebiederm-aS9lmoZGLiVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org (Eric W. Biederman) Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Devices visibility container Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 07:30:44 -0600 Message-ID: References: <46F77523.9020001@openvz.org> <46F8BD33.5040108@openvz.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: In-Reply-To: <46F8BD33.5040108-GEFAQzZX7r8dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org> (Pavel Emelyanov's message of "Tue, 25 Sep 2007 11:48:03 +0400") List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: containers-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org Errors-To: containers-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org To: Pavel Emelyanov Cc: Linux Containers , Paul Menage List-Id: containers.vger.kernel.org Pavel Emelyanov writes: > > Oh! Can you provide us an example when after the migration some > device's major+minor pair change on the same device? SCSI disks on a SAN. Network accessible block devices. All kinds of logical/virtual devices like ttys, the loop device, and ramdisks. It isn't especially frequent that something cares, but fundamentally the same issues apply. Eric