linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 5/5] Add a Signal Control Group Subsystem

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <6599ad830804242301s6a00dd75ye212a28f97072b68@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 24 Apr 2008 23:01:46 -0700
From:	"Paul Menage" <menage@...gle.com>
To:	"Matt Helsley" <matthltc@...ibm.com>
Cc:	Linux-Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Cedric Le Goater" <clg@...ibm.com>,
	"Oren Laadan" <orenl@...columbia.edu>,
	"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Pavel Machek" <pavel@....cz>, linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	"Linux Containers" <containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 5/5] Add a Signal Control Group Subsystem

I don't think you need cgroup_signal.h. It's only included in
cgroup_signal.c, and doesn't really contain any useful definitions
anyway. You should just use a cgroup_subsys_state object as your state
object, since you'll never need to do anything with it anyway.

>+static struct cgroup_subsys_state *signal_create(
>+	struct cgroup_subsys *ss, struct cgroup *cgroup)
>+{
>+	struct stateless *dummy;
>+
>+	if (!capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
>+		return ERR_PTR(-EPERM);

This is unnecessary.

>+
+	dummy = kzalloc(sizeof(struct stateless), GFP_KERNEL);
+	if (!dummy)
+		return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
+	return  &dummy->css;
+}

This function could be simplified to:

struct cgroup_subsys_state *css;
css = kzalloc(sizeof(*css), GFP_KERNEL);
return css ?: ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);

>+static int signal_can_attach(struct cgroup_subsys *ss,
>+			     struct cgroup *new_cgroup,
>+			     struct task_struct *task)
>+{
>+	return 0;
>+}

No need for a can_attach() method if it just returns 0 - that's the default.

>+static int signal_kill(struct cgroup *cgroup, int signum)
>+{
>+	struct cgroup_iter it;
>+	struct task_struct *task;
>+	int retval = 0;
>+
>+	cgroup_iter_start(cgroup, &it);
>+	while ((task = cgroup_iter_next(cgroup, &it))) {
>+		retval = send_sig(signum, task, 1);
>+		if (retval)
>+			break;
>+	}
>+	cgroup_iter_end(cgroup, &it);
>+
>+	return retval;
>+}

cgroup_iter_start() takes a read lock - is send_sig() guaranteed not to sleep?

>+static ssize_t signal_write(struct cgroup *cgroup,
>+			     struct cftype *cft,
>+			     struct file *file,
>+			     const char __user *userbuf,
>+			     size_t nbytes, loff_t *unused_ppos)

This should just be a write_u64() method - cgroups will handle the
copying/parsing for you. See e.g.
kernel/sched.c:cpu_shares_write_u64()

>+static struct cftype kill_file = {
>+	.name = "kill",
>+	.write = signal_write,
>+	.private = 0,
>+};

I agree with PaulJ that "signal.send" would be a nicer name for this
than "signal.kill"
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/