linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] clone3: allow spawning processes into cgroups

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: <20200108181049.ysmo73celrt4bvo2@wittgenstein>
Date:   Wed, 8 Jan 2020 19:10:49 +0100
From:   Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>
To:     Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>
Cc:     linux-api@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, cgroups@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] clone3: allow spawning processes into cgroups

On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 05:01:02PM +0100, Michal Koutný wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 07:15:03AM +0100, Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com> wrote:
> > This adds support for creating a process in a different cgroup than its
> > parent.
> Binding fork and migration together looks useful.
> 
> > --- a/kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c
> > +++ b/kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c
> > @@ -5882,21 +5882,176 @@ void cgroup_fork(struct task_struct *child)
> >  	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&child->cg_list);
> Just a nitpick, I noticed the comment for cgroup_fork should be updated
> too (generic migration happens in cgroup_post_fork).

Thanks.

> 
> > --- a/kernel/fork.c
> > +++ b/kernel/fork.c
> > [...]
> > @@ -2279,8 +2278,7 @@ static __latent_entropy struct task_struct *copy_process(
> >  	write_unlock_irq(&tasklist_lock);
> >  
> >  	proc_fork_connector(p);
> > -	cgroup_post_fork(p);
> > -	cgroup_threadgroup_change_end(current);
> > +	cgroup_post_fork(current, p, args);
> I can see that when CLONE_INTO_CGROUP | CLONE_NEWCGROUP is passed, then
> the child's cgroup NS will be rooted at parent's css set
> (copy_namespaces precedes cgroup_post_fork).
> 
> Wouldn't it make better sense if this flags combination resulted in
> child's NS rooted in its css set?

I need to take a closer look but it sounds like we should move the
copying of the cgroup namespace to a later point; but again I need to
look into this.

Thanks!
Christian