3 ms·
To be fair, even the namespace design of Plan 9 isn't very elegant, because file-base API hits its own limit pretty quickly. Linux had to abuse `ioctl` to avoid
by esjeon 3y ago
To be fair, even the namespace design of Plan 9 isn't very elegant, because file-base API hits its own limit pretty quickly. Linux had to abuse `ioctl` to avoid that.
The best namespace design should come from the microkernel world, where isolation can be achieved by simply rerouting outgoing API calls to alternate servers. This will also allow injecting all kinds of crazy/complicated policies in the middle.
- ori_b 3y agoThat's... More or less how it works in plan 9? http://man.9front.org/3/mnt http://man.9front.org/3/mnt
- esjeon 3y agoYes, but the simplicity is in a different level. Especially in nameserver-based designs, which is quite major, namespacing is a matter of using a different nameserver. The implementation boils down to one syscall that writes to a single uint value in the process struct (which would take, idk, 10 lines in total?).