linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cgroup-v1: freezer: optionally killable freezer

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: <20200302165330.GA505299@carbon.DHCP.thefacebook.com>
Date:   Mon, 2 Mar 2020 08:53:30 -0800
From:   Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>
To:     Marco Ballesio <balejs@...gle.com>
CC:     <tj@...nel.org>, <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <lizefan@...wei.com>,
        <hannes@...xchg.org>, <corbet@....net>, <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        <pavel@....cz>, <len.brown@...el.com>, <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>, <minchan@...gle.com>,
        <surenb@...gle.com>, <dancol@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cgroup-v1: freezer: optionally killable freezer

On Sun, Mar 01, 2020 at 08:20:03AM -0800, Marco Ballesio wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 29, 2020 at 10:43:00AM -0800, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 04:51:31PM -0800, Marco Ballesio wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > > 
> > > did anyone have time to look into my proposal and, in case, are there
> > > any suggestions, ideas or comments about it?
> > 
> > Hello, Marco!
> > 
> > I'm sorry, somehow I missed the original letter.
> > 
> > In general the cgroup v1 interface is considered frozen. Are there any particular
> > reasons why you want to extend the v1 freezer rather than use the v2 version of it?
> > 
> > You don't even need to fully convert to cgroup v2 in order to do it, some v1
> > controllers can still be used.
> > 
> > Thanks!
> > 
> > Roman
> 
> Hi Roman,
> 
> When compared with backports of v2 features and their dependency chains, this
> patch would be easier to carry in Android common. The potential is to have
> killability for frozen processes on hw currently in use.

I see...

The implementation looks good to me, but I really not sure if adding new control files
to cgroup v1 is a good idea at this point. Are there any plans in the Android world
to move forward to cgroup v2? If not, why not?
If there are any specific issues/dependencies, let's discuss and resolve them.

Thanks!

Roman