linux-kernel - Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH v3] sched: automated per tty task groups

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]

Date:	Tue, 16 Nov 2010 10:25:52 -0800
From:	Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>
To:	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@...ppelsdorf.de>,
	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...e.fr>
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH v3] sched: automated per tty task groups

On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 4:58 AM, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de> wrote:
>
> A tasty alternative would be to have autogroup be it's own subsystem,
> with full cgroup userspace visibility/tweakability.

What exactly do you envisage by that? Having autogroup (in its current
incarnation) be a subsystem wouldn't really make sense - there's
already a cgroup subsystem for partitioning CPU scheduler groups. If
autogroups were integrated with cgroups I think that it would be as a
way of automatically creating (and destroying?) groups based on tty
connectedness.

We tried something like this with the ns subsystem, which would
create/enter a new cgroup whenever a new namespace was created; in the
end it turned out to be more of a nuisance than anything else.

People have proposed all sorts of in-kernel approaches for
auto-creation of cgroups based on things like userid, process name,
now tty, etc.

The previous effort for kernel process grouping (CKRM) started off
with a complex in-kernel rules engine that was ultimately dropped and
moved to userspace. My feeling is that userspace is a better place for
this - as Lennart pointed out, you can get a similar effect with a few
lines tweaking in a bash login script or a pam module that's much more
configurable from userspace and keeps all the existing cgroup stats
available.

Paul
--
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/