From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/11] sysfs: Implement sysfs tagged directory support. Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2008 00:50:04 -0700 Message-ID: References: <20080618170729.808539948@theryb.frec.bull.fr> <20080618170731.002784342@theryb.frec.bull.fr> <485F04E1.70204@gmail.com> <486706C9.9040303@gmail.com> <20080630214421.GA29605@us.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20080630214421.GA29605@us.ibm.com> (Serge E. Hallyn's message of "Mon, 30 Jun 2008 16:44:23 -0500") Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Serge E. Hallyn" Cc: Tejun Heo , Benjamin Thery , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Andrew Morton , Daniel Lezcano , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Al Viro , Linux Containers List-Id: containers.vger.kernel.org "Serge E. Hallyn" writes: > Now that the iproute2 patch is upstream, this patchset really is the > only thing keeping us from using network namespaces. Given that the > details of the tagging are trivially changeable with no abi changes, I'd > personally much rather see the patches go in as is, with whatever new > tagging patches Benjamin whips up, using ida or some new idea, being > applied later if we feel the need. My point exactly. No one seems to contest the userspace semantics so as long as we don't put ourselves into a real mess we should be fine. Eric