: Make some sysctl RO in net namespaces.
Get series with b4
b4 am [email protected]Versions newest first
- v1 Latest5 patches 1 replyIn review
Patches in v1 No applies recorded yet
| # | Subject and files | Size | Replies | Applied |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1/5 | : Merge equal code in sysctl proc handlers.fs/ | +11 | 0 replies | |
| 2/5 | : Clean sysctls from unneeded extern and forward declarations.include/ kernel/ | +68 | 0 replies | |
| 3/5 | : Add the ->permissions callback on the ctl_table_root.fs/ include/ kernel/ | +26 | 0 replies | |
| 4/5 | : Create the net sysctl root for RO tables.include/ net/ | +35 | 0 replies | |
| 5/5 | : Move some net.core sysctls to RO root.net/ | +17 | 0 replies |
Reviews trailers per patch
No Reviewed-by, Acked-by or Tested-by trailers for v1 yet.
Cover letter [PATCH net-2.6.26 0/5][SYSCTL]: Make some sysctl RO in net namespaces.
Hi, David.
Some time ago, when I made the net.core.somaxconn ctl per-namespace, you told that the approach I used to make some ctl tables read-only in namespace was not very good and said to improve it. After looking at other code, I decided, that many ctl variables will have to be read-only in namespace, so we need some generic way to do this.
So, here's the patchset, that allows to create ctl tables, that are read-only in some namespace in general (and in some net namespace in particular). I tried to make it work the way not to consume extra memory at run time.
This patchset is related to net namespaces only, but on the other hand it affects the core sysctl engine. What is your opinion about this set:
should I send these patches (or some of them) to Andrew instead and wait till it appears in mainline (and sequentially in net tree) or will you accept this one in net-2.6.26?
Thanks,
Pavel