On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 02:53:30PM -0700, Roman V Shaposhnik wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-06-30 at 16:31 -0500, Nicolas Williams wrote:
> > also prevents one from sharing an autofs mount to more than one zone,
> > which cannot work out well since it would allow a filesystem mounted by
> > one zone to be visible by another.
> I guess I'm not quite following here. Could you, please, ellaborate?
> IOW, what is an example of a global zone autofs mount point that:
> * can be triggered from zoneA
> * make the resulting filesystem appear in zoneB
> assuming that zoneA and zoneB have distinct zone roots?
I don't know if autofs mounts could be shared via lofs and still trigger
> > >
> > > http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/onnv/onnv-gate/usr/src/uts/common/fs/nfs/nfs_subr.c#4985
> > That's a very big hammer that doesn't have quite the effect that you
> > might think that it does. Or at least for me figuring out its effect
> > requires reading much code and it currently looks very, very iffy as it
> > causes EIO to be returned in some cases, for example, as in nfs4_open():
> > 614 if (nfs_zone() != VTOMI4(*vpp)->mi_zone)
> > 615 return (EIO);
> > Probably not what you want!
> No. That actually gives me exactly what I want (to the extent that I
> tested it):
> global-zone# mount server:/share /containers/local-zone/root/mnt
> local-zone# cat /mnt/test.txt
> Hello world!
> If it were not for the scary comment that this is a temporary hack
> that needs to go away -- I'd be using it for real work already.
I don't know that that's enough. To me it doesn't look like it, but
I've not tried it.
> > The problem at hand is a reentrance issue in the VM.
> Could you, please, point me to the most authoritative CR that captures
> this issue?
Hasn't it been mentioned in this thread already? I could search for it,
but so could you -- I wouldn't know if off the top of my head any more
than you would.
zones-discuss mailing list