On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Amir Goldstein <a...@cellrox.com> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 2:51 AM, Eric W. Biederman > <ebied...@xmission.com>wrote: > >> Amir Goldstein <a...@cellrox.com> writes: >> >> > On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 7:50 PM, Eric W. Biederman >> > <ebied...@xmission.com> wrote: >> > >> > Hi Eric, >> > >> > If we can get people to take a quick look at the code before LPC >> > that could make the LPC discussions more effective.
Hi, I think we are curious enough to experiment with Erics idea of implementing basic 'device namespace' in userspace (never miss an opportunity to throw away kernel code). Can anyone point out any obvious reason why this would not work if we consider bulk of the work being plain access filtering? That being said, is there a valid reason why binder is part of device namespace here instead of IPC? -- Janne ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ October Webinars: Code for Performance Free Intel webinars can help you accelerate application performance. Explore tips for MPI, OpenMP, advanced profiling, and more. Get the most from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60133471&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Lxc-devel mailing list Lxc-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lxc-devel
