On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 10:11:55AM -0500, Rob Landley wrote: > > Or do you think it will simply never cause a problem, so there's no > need to worry?
Based on the limited number of drivers that will be using this interface, I don't think there's any need to worry. But I will be glad to revisit this in the future if needed. > >> Or is this because containers allow UID/GID to be redefined, and > >> thus imposing magic values on userspace can now be mapped away or > >> something? > > > >I don't understand, what do you mean by this? > > I mean that each container can have its own UID/GID namespace now, I > was wondering if a driver claims a UID that an existing root > filsystem is already using for something else, can a container remap > it away so it doesn't conflict? Or will it still need manual udev > rules to adjust at hotplug time? I don't know how containers deal with the userspace major/minor device nodes today at all, so I can't answer that. But see the review comments from Eric that he sent, I'll make the needed changes based on that so all should be ok after that. thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
