linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv3 1/3] rdmacg: Added rdma cgroup controller.

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: <CAG53R5VNt3Q+1Uaze6MVak7dkeFFtcioFHdsX0CXiEvRB-p4wQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 12 Feb 2016 02:47:18 +0530
From:	Parav Pandit <pandit.parav@...il.com>
To:	Haggai Eran <haggaie@...lanox.com>
Cc:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, lizefan@...wei.com,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
	Liran Liss <liranl@...lanox.com>,
	"Hefty, Sean" <sean.hefty@...el.com>,
	Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, james.l.morris@...cle.com,
	serge@...lyn.com, Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
	Matan Barak <matanb@...lanox.com>, raindel@...lanox.com,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 1/3] rdmacg: Added rdma cgroup controller.

On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 9:57 PM, Haggai Eran <haggaie@...lanox.com> wrote:
>
> There is indeed an effort to backport the latest RDMA subsystem modules to
> older kernels, and it would be preferable to be able to introduce new
> resources through these modules.
Right. There is hardly 10 to 20 lines of code that allows to support
this functionality. So I think its good thing to have.


> > If resources are defined by RDMA cgroup kernel than adding/removing
> > resource means, someone have to do lot of engineering with different
> > versions of kernel support and loadable module support using compat.h
> > etc at driver level, which in my mind is some amount of engineering
> > compare to what v5 has to offer and its already available. With one
> > round of cleanup in resource definition, it should be usable.
> If I understand correctly, if the resources are defined in the cgroup,
> you simply won't be able to add new resources with a module update,
> no matter how hard you work.
>

Yes.