linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/3] cgroup/pids: Separate semantics of pids.events related to pids.max

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20200212230307.GB88887@mtj.thefacebook.com>
Date:   Wed, 12 Feb 2020 18:03:07 -0500
From:   Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:     Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>
Cc:     cgroups@...r.kernel.org, Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/3] cgroup/pids: Separate semantics of
 pids.events related to pids.max

On Wed, Feb 05, 2020 at 02:44:24PM +0100, Michal Koutný wrote:
> Currently, when pids.max limit is breached in the hierarchy, the event
> is counted and reported in the cgroup where the forking task resides.
> 
> This decouples the limit and the notification caused by the limit making
> it hard to detect when the actual limit was effected.
> 
> Let's introduce new events:
> 	  max
> 		The number of times the limit of the cgroup was hit.
> 
> 	  max.imposed
> 		The number of times fork failed in the cgroup because of self
> 		or ancestor limit.

Can you please follow the same convention as memory.events and
memory.events.local?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun