linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] user_ns: use correct check for single-threadedness

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:	Wed, 5 Aug 2015 06:13:22 -0700
From:	Ricky Zhou <ricky@...ou.org>
To:	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@...allels.com>,
	Ricky Zhou <rickyz@...omium.org>,
	Julien Tinnes <jln@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] user_ns: use correct check for single-threadedness

On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 4:53 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill@...temov.name> wrote:
>> 'only' if it's multi-threaded, i.e. when some workload cares so much about
>> performance that it uses multiple threads?
>>
>> Can you see the contradiction there?
>
> I can. man 2 unshare:
>
>         CLONE_NEWUSER requires that the calling process  is  not  threaded;
>
> The workload cares so much about performance that it ignores API
> requirements. Some slow down looks like a fair price to me.
To be fair, the entire reason for this patch is that the slow path
(mm_users > 1) can happen even when the process is single-threaded. I
was concerned about how expensive current_is_single_threaded looked as
well, but didn't see any lightweight alternatives short of adding a
field to mm_struct. Do folks think it's worth going down that route
instead?

Thanks,
Ricky
--
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/