linux-kernel - [proposal] delegating cgroup manager to non-PID1

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 1 Mar 2015 23:25:17 +0000
From:	Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl@...l.net>
To:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: [proposal] delegating cgroup manager to non-PID1

(i am subscribed nomail to lkml, please cc thx)

in recent discussions about PID-1 alternatives (sysvinit, openrc,
systemd, depinit) i was alerted to the idea that PID1 is to become the
sole exlcusive process permitted to manage cgroups.  given that, just
as one specific example, depinit is only around 2,300 lines of c code,
adding extra code to manage cgroups is of some concern especially in
light of the general UNIX philosophy "do one thing and do it well".

to allow the general UNIX philosophy to be honoured, may i
respectfully propose an additional linux kernel systemcall which
permits delegation - solely and exclusively by PID1 - of the
management of cgroups to one (and only one) other process, and that
furthermore that the process must be an immediate child of PID1?

l.
--
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/