Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

glossary: Remove "leaf" and "hierarchy" from container namespace definition #852

Merged

Conversation

wking
Copy link
Contributor

@wking wking commented May 24, 2017

Namespaces are not all hierarchical and processes aren't always in leaves.

Spun off from #795.

…nition

Namespaces are not all hierarchical and processes aren't always in
leaves.

Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King <wking@tremily.us>
@wking
Copy link
Contributor Author

wking commented May 31, 2017

Pulled in #853 based on today's meeting.

glossary.md Outdated
New container namespaces will be created as children of the runtime namespaces.

On Linux, the namespaces from which new [container namespaces](#container-namespace) are [created](config-linux.md#namespaces) and from which some configured resources are accessed.
Examples of resources retrieved from this namespace include [`linux.namespaces[].path`](config-linux.md#namespaces) and the [`resctrl` psuedo-filesystem used for `linux.intelRdt`](config-linux.md#intelrdt).
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please remove this line.

glossary.md Outdated
New container namespaces will be created as children of the runtime namespaces.

On Linux, the namespaces from which new [container namespaces](#container-namespace) are [created](config-linux.md#namespaces) and from which some configured resources are accessed.
Examples of resources retrieved from this namespace include [`linux.namespaces[].path`](config-linux.md#namespaces) and the [`resctrl` psuedo-filesystem used for `linux.intelRdt`](config-linux.md#intelrdt).
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Remove this line.

@mrunalp mrunalp added this to the 1.0.0 milestone Jun 1, 2017
…tion

Namespaces are not all hierarchical and processes aren't always in
leaves.  Also punt to config-linux.md for details about namespace
creation, although currently that section doesn't talk much about how
the runtime namespaces relate to new container namespaces [1].

Also mention resource access, because runtime namespaces play a role
even if no new container namespaces are created.  I've used resources
that currently explicitly mention runtime namespaces as examples,
although I think more resources (e.g. root.path and mounts[].source
[2,3]) deserve wording about that as well and would be better examples
if they'd already landed such wording.

Examples of resources retrieved from this namespace include
linux.namespaces[].path and the resctrl psuedo-filesystem used for
`linux.intelRdt`, but Mrunal and Michael didn't want me to include the
examples in the glossary entry (probably because they could go stale).

[1]: opencontainers#795 (comment)
[2]: opencontainers#735 (comment)
[3]: opencontainers@604205e#diff-c9c91c29b41257aea3a3403cc606ad99R65

Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King <wking@tremily.us>
@wking wking force-pushed the cleaner-container-namespace-glossary branch from 5c50462 to b536f13 Compare June 1, 2017 17:57
@mrunalp
Copy link
Contributor

mrunalp commented Jun 1, 2017

LGTM

Approved with PullApprove

1 similar comment
@crosbymichael
Copy link
Member

crosbymichael commented Jun 1, 2017

LGTM

Approved with PullApprove

@mrunalp mrunalp merged commit 1ff127d into opencontainers:master Jun 1, 2017
@wking wking deleted the cleaner-container-namespace-glossary branch June 2, 2017 04:17
@vbatts vbatts mentioned this pull request Jul 5, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants