From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Dichtel Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 0/6] namespaces: log namespaces per task Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 19:43:30 +0200 Message-ID: <53F4DE42.40308@6wind.com> References: <1400593754.15733.4.camel@flatline.rdu.redhat.com> <20140520140146.GA8079@madcap2.tricolour.ca> <20140819164617.GE9003@madcap2.tricolour.ca> <8738crst5i.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <20140820162511.GS4462@madcap2.tricolour.ca> Reply-To: nicolas.dichtel-pdR9zngts4EAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20140820162511.GS4462-bcJWsdo4jJjeVoXN4CMphl7TgLCtbB0G@public.gmane.org> 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: Richard Guy Briggs , "Eric W. Biederman" Cc: linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, containers-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-audit-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, netdev List-Id: linux-audit@redhat.com Le 20/08/2014 18:25, Richard Guy Briggs a =E9crit : > On 14/08/19, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> Richard Guy Briggs writes: >> >>> On 14/05/20, Richard Guy Briggs wrote: >>>> On 14/05/20, Eric Paris wrote: >>>>> On Tue, 2014-05-20 at 09:12 -0400, Richard Guy Briggs wrote: >>>>>> The purpose is to track namespaces in use by logged processes from t= he >>>>>> perspective of init_*_ns. >>> >>> (Including the Linux API list due to the additions to /proc//ns/. >>> Please see http://www.kernelhub.org/?p=3D2&msg=3D477668 and in particul= ar >>> http://www.kernelhub.org/?msg=3D477678&p=3D2 ) >> >> Sigh if you have to use something like this use the proc inode >> number. It is the same thing. >> >> I hate to claim it is unique absent of the proc superblock but it is and >> will be for the forseable future. >> >> It would be better to include the block device number that appears in >> proc of 3h of the primary mount of to qualify the number. But it is not >> particularly important. Coming up with an additional unique number that >> needs to be maintained seems stronlgy silly. > > I am reading a contradiction here: > https://www.redhat.com/archives/linux-audit/2013-March/msg00032.html > > and this posting went completely ignored: > https://www.redhat.com/archives/linux-audit/2014-January/msg00180.html > > And then there was this patchset and thread where there was some good > discussion to clarify the use case: > https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/4/22/662 > > Then V2: > https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/9/637 > > Then V3 3 months ago: > https://www.redhat.com/archives/linux-audit/2014-May/msg00071.html > > I'm about to post another version of the patchset addressing Eric Paris' > concerns about record types, field naming... I also try to find a solution to identify netns in userland to solve some network problems (see = http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/315933/focus=3D321753). This serial number solution may be reused for this. We really need to find a way to solve this. Regards, Nicolas