linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv2 7/7] cgroup: mount cgroupns-root when inside non-init cgroupns

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: <CALCETrUggQCJyxsTWRNrjt3GM=R0VMU6RjMkU1aw3YUNMx1xEw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 4 Nov 2014 07:00:15 -0800
From:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	Aditya Kali <adityakali@...gle.com>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>,
	Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@...ntu.com>,
	cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Linux Containers <containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	Rohit Jnagal <jnagal@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 7/7] cgroup: mount cgroupns-root when inside non-init cgroupns

On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 5:46 AM, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
> Hello, Aditya.
>
> On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 02:43:47PM -0800, Aditya Kali wrote:
>> I agree that this is effectively bind-mounting, but doing this in kernel
>> makes it really convenient for the userspace. The process that sets up the
>> container doesn't need to care whether it should bind-mount cgroupfs inside
>> the container or not. The tasks inside the container can mount cgroupfs on
>> as-needed basis. The root container manager can simply unshare cgroupns and
>> forget about the internal setup. I think this is useful just for the reason
>> that it makes life much simpler for userspace.
>
> If it's okay to require userland to just do bind mounting, I'd be far
> happier with that.  cgroup mount code is already overcomplicated
> because of the dynamic matching of supers to mounts when it could just
> have told userland to use bind mounting.  Doesn't the host side have
> to set up some of the filesystem layouts anyway?  Does it really
> matter that we require the host to set up cgroup hierarchy too?
>

Sort of, but only sort of.

You can create a container by unsharing namespaces, mounting
everything, and then calling pivot_root.  But this is unpleasant
because of the strange way that pid namespaces work -- you generally
have to fork first, so this gets tedious.  And it doesn't integrate
well with things like fstab or other container-side configuration
mechanisms.

It's nicer if you can unshare namespaces, mount the bare minimum,
pivot_root, and let the contained software do as much setup as
possible.

--Andy
--
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/