linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/10] cgroups: Task counter subsystem v6

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <20111214150752.GB10791@somewhere.redhat.com>
Date:	Wed, 14 Dec 2011 16:07:56 +0100
From:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Paul Menage <paul@...lmenage.org>,
	Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Aditya Kali <adityakali@...gle.com>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>,
	Tim Hockin <thockin@...kin.org>,
	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
	Containers <containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] cgroups: Task counter subsystem v6

On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 12:49:18PM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 08:06:46PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 07:58:48AM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > > Can you please rebase the patchset on top of cgroup/for-3.3?
> > 
> > Sure. But please note its fate is still under discussion. Whether
> > we want it upstream is still a running debate. But I certainly
> > need to rebase against your tree.
> 
> I see.
> 
> > > I primarily like the idea of being able to track process usage w/ cgroup
> > > and enforce limits on it but hope that it could somehow integrate w/
> > > cgroup freezer.  ie. trigger freezer if it goes over limit and let the
> > > userland tool / administrator deal with the frozen cgroup.  I'm
> > > planning on extending cgroup freezer such that it supports recursive
> > > freezing and killing of frozen tasks.  If we can fit task counters
> > > into that, we'll have general method of handling problematic cgroups -
> > > freeze, notify userland and let it deal with it.
> > 
> > Hmm, so you suggest a kernel trigger that freeze the cgroup when the
> > task limit is reached?
> 
> Yeah, something like that.  I'm not really sure about how it would
> actually work tho.
> 
> > What about rather implementing register_event() for the tasks.usage such
> > that the user can be notified using eventfd when the limit is reached.
> > Then it would be up to the user to decide to freeze or any other thing.
> > Sounds like a more generic solution.
> 
> Maybe, the problem would be how to ensure that the userland manager
> can respond fast enough (whatever that means...).

Yeah that's part of the goal of the task counter: limit the spreading
of the forkbomb soon enough such that the machine stays responsive and
the admin can react accordingly.
--
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/