Open Stack

To summarize, should we...

A) Assume all kernels will be 3.8+ and use mount namespace (risky?)
B) Do a check to ensure kernel is 3.8+ and fall back to net namespace and
mount --bind if not (more work).
C) Just use net namespace as indication that namespace with mount --bind
done (simple)

Maybe it is best to just do the simple thing for now. I wanted to double
check though, to see if the alternatives could/should be considered.

Regards,

PCM


PCM (Paul Michali)

IRC............ pc_m (irc.freenode.com)
Twitter....... @pmichali


On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 1:35 AM, Joshua Zhang <joshua.zhang at canonical.com>
wrote:

> pls note that actually this patch doesn't have minumum kernel requirement
> because it only uses 'mount --bind' and 'net namespace', not use 'mount
> namespace'. ('mount --bind' is since linux 2.4, 'net namespace' is since
> Linux 3.0, 'mount namespace' is since Linux 3.8).
>
> so I think sanity checks for 3.8 is not need, any thoughts ?
>
> thanks.
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 2:12 PM, Kevin Benton <blak111 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> >If we can consolidate that and use a single tool from the master neutron
>> repository, that would be my vote.
>>
>> +1 with a hook mechanism so the sanity checks stay in the *aas repos and
>> they are only run if installed.
>>
>>>
>> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 7:30 AM, Kyle Mestery <mestery at mestery.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 10:27 AM, Ihar Hrachyshka <ihrachys at redhat.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>  On 01/20/2015 05:40 PM, Paul Michali wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/146508/ is adding support for
>>>> StrongSwan VPN, which needs mount bind to be able to specify different
>>>> paths for config files.
>>>>
>>>>  The code, which used some older patch, does a test for
>>>> /proc/1/ns/net, instead of /proc/1/ns/mnt, because it stated that the
>>>> latter is only supported in kernel 3.8+. That was a while ago, and I'm
>>>> wondering if the condition is still true.  If we know that for Kilo and on,
>>>> we'll be dealing with 3.8+ kernels, we could use the more accurate test.
>>>>
>>>>  Can we require 3.8+ kernel for this?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think we can but it's better to check with distributions. Red Hat
>>>> wise, we ship a kernel that is newer than 3.8.
>>>>
>>>>  If so, how and where do we ensure that is true?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ideally, you would implement a sanity check for the feature you need
>>>> from the kernel. Though it opens a question of whether we want to ship
>>>> multiple sanity check tools for each of repos (neutron + 3 *aas repos).
>>>>
>>>> If we can consolidate that and use a single tool from the master
>>> neutron repository, that would be my vote.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>  Also, if you can kindly review the code here:
>>>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/146508/5/neutron_vpnaas/services/vpn/common/netns_wrapper.py,
>>>> I'd really appreciate it, as I'm not versed in the Linux proc files at all.
>>>>
>>>>  Thanks!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>   PCM (Paul Michali)
>>>>
>>>>  IRC............ pc_m (irc.freenode.com)
>>>> Twitter....... @pmichali
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> __________________________________________________________________________
>>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>>> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribehttp://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> __________________________________________________________________________
>>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>>> Unsubscribe:
>>>> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> __________________________________________________________________________
>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>> Unsubscribe:
>>> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Kevin Benton
>>
>> __________________________________________________________________________
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe:
>> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards
> Zhang Hua(张华）
> Software Engineer | Canonical
> IRC:  zhhuabj
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20150123/0191af1c/attachment.html>