On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 10:14:26PM -0500, James Bottomley wrote:

On Sun, 2022-11-20 at 17:13 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:

quoted

On Sat, Nov 19, 2022 at 01:20:09AM -0500, Nayna wrote:

quoted

On 11/17/22 16:27, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:

quoted

On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 06:03:43PM -0500, Nayna wrote:

quoted

On 11/10/22 04:58, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:

[...]

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

I do not understand, sorry.  What does namespaces have to do
with this?
sysfs can already handle namespaces just fine, why not use
that?

Firmware objects are not namespaced. I mentioned it here as an
example of the difference between firmware and kernel objects.
It is also in response to the feedback from James Bottomley in
RFC v2 [
https://lore.kernel.org/linuxppc-dev/41ca51e8db9907d9060cc38ad
b59a66dcae4c59b.camel@HansenPartnership.com/].

I do not understand, sorry.  Do you want to use a namespace for
these or not?  The code does not seem to be using namespaces. 
You can use sysfs with, or without, a namespace so I don't
understand the issue here.

With your code, there is no namespace.

You are correct. There's no namespace for these.

So again, I do not understand.  Do you want to use filesystem
namespaces, or do you not?

Since this seems to go back to my email quoted again, let me repeat:
the question isn't if this patch is namespaced; I think you've agreed
several times it isn't.  The question is if the exposed properties
would ever need to be namespaced.  This is a subtle and complex
question which isn't at all explored by the above interchange.

quoted

How again can you not use sysfs or securityfs due to namespaces? 
What is missing?

I already explained in the email that sysfs contains APIs like
simple_pin_... which are completely inimical to namespacing.

Then how does the networking code handle the namespace stuff in sysfs?
That seems to work today, or am I missing something?

If the namespace support needs to be fixed up in sysfs (or in
securityfs), then great, let's do that, and not write a whole new
filesystem just because that's not done.

Also this patch series also doesn't handle namespaces, so again, I am
totally confused as to why this is even being discussed...

thanks,

greg k-h