linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 8/8] net: Implement socketat.

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: <1285243881.5036.22.camel@bigi>
Date:	Thu, 23 Sep 2010 08:11:21 -0400
From:	jamal <hadi@...erus.ca>
To:	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>
Cc:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux Containers <containers@...ts.osdl.org>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...e.fr>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
	Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...il.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>,
	Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>,
	Matt Helsley <matthltc@...ibm.com>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
	Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ozas.de>,
	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] net: Implement socketat.

On Thu, 2010-09-23 at 15:53 +0400, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:

> Why does it matter? You told, that the usage scenario was to
> add routes to container. If I do 2 syscalls instead of 1, is
> it THAT worse?
> 

Anything to do with socket IO that requires namespace awareness
applies for usage; it could be tcp/udp/etc socket. If it doesnt
make any difference performance wise using one scheme vs other
to write/read heavy messages then i dont see an issue and socketat
is redundant.

If i was to pick blindly - I would say whatever approach with
less syscalls is better even if just a "slow" path one time
thing. I could create a scenario which would make it bad
to have more syscalls.

But theres also the simplicity aspect in doing:
fdx = socketat namespace foo
use fdx for read/write/poll into foo without any wrapper code.
Vs
enter foo
fdx = socket ..
read/write fdx
leave foo.

> Just like it used to before the enter.
> 

So if i enter foo, get a fdx, leave foo i can use it in
ns0 as if it was in ns0?

cheers,
jamal

--
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/