linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] kmod: Run usermodehelpers only on cpus allowed for kthreadd V2

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: <20131108191235.GB12853@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Fri, 8 Nov 2013 20:12:46 +0100
From:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@...ine.de>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@...yossef.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kmod: Run usermodehelpers only on cpus allowed for
 kthreadd V2

On Fri, Nov 08, 2013 at 05:05:35PM +0000, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Nov 2013, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> 
> > But it looks like it always end up calling a workqueue. May be I missed something though.
> >
> > Now we can argue that this workqueue seem to create kernel threads, which in turn create other kernel thread (uhh?)
> > and I don't know if those inherit the kworker affinity. But from a quick look, it seems to me that
> > this is what we want.
> 
> Right. The problem is that the affinity cannot be inherited since
> usermodehelper may be called from a workqueue or other restricted kernel
> context. The main point of the usermodehelper logic is to work itself out
> of the restrictions of the context in which is was called to be able to
> fork off a kernel thread that then can call a userspace helper program.

I understand, but why not solving that from the workqueue affinity? We want to
solve the issue of unbound workqueues in CPU isolation anyway.

> 
> I want to restrict on which processors this working out of the limiting
> context can occur. It should not occur on low latency processors nor
> should user space stuff be run there.
> 
> Without this patch we see various processes being sprinkled over all the
> processors in the system when usermodehelper is invoked.

I got that, and I too am interested in solving this problem. I'm not fighting
against the purpose of this patch but against the way we solve that.
--
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/