From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Subject: Re: [PATCH] netns: Coexist with the sysfs limitations Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2008 08:40:09 -0700 Message-ID: References: <20081022152144.351965414@theryb.frec.bull.fr> <20081022212124.GA9910@us.ibm.com> <49003019.40904@bull.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "Serge E. Hallyn" , netdev , Dave Miller , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Al Viro , Daniel Lezcano , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Tejun Heo , Denis Lunev , Linux Containers To: Benjamin Thery Return-path: Received: from out01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.231]:32899 "EHLO out01.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752424AbYJWPoh (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Oct 2008 11:44:37 -0400 In-Reply-To: <49003019.40904@bull.net> (Benjamin Thery's message of "Thu, 23 Oct 2008 10:04:41 +0200") Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Benjamin Thery writes: > Serge E. Hallyn wrote: >> Quoting Eric W. Biederman (ebiederm@xmission.com): >>> To make testing of the network namespace simpler allow >>> the network namespace code and the sysfs code to be >>> compiled and run at the same time. To do this only >>> virtual devices are allowed in the additional network >>> namespaces and those virtual devices are not placed >>> in the kobject tree. >>> >>> Since virtual devices don't actually do anything interesting >>> hardware wise that needs device management there should >>> be no loss in keeping them out of the kobject tree and >>> by implication sysfs. The gain in ease of testing >>> and code coverage should be significant. >>> >>> I.e. people running distributions that make it next to >>> impossible to boot without sysfs should at be able to >>> boot a test kernel now. >>> >>> Plus no ABIs are harmed with this patch. > >>> Signed-off-by: Eric W. Biederman >> >> Duh. >> >> Tested-by: Serge Hallyn >> Acked-by: Serge Hallyn > > Oh, this patch is short, clean, and the limitation introduced isn't too > annoying for testing netns right now. > > At least, my proposal provoked some reactions :) Yes. > BTW, there's a second limitation with your patch: > we can't rename the net devices in the additional network namespaces. > > In net/core/dev.c, dev_change_name() fails: call to device_rename() return an > (expected) -EINVAL error. > Maybe we should add a test on the net to only call it in init_net? Yes. Good catch. Eric