linux-kernel - Re: [Patch v3 0/2] cgroup: KVM: New Encryption IDs 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: <X9E6eZaIFDhzrqWO@mtj.duckdns.org>
Date:   Wed, 9 Dec 2020 15:58:33 -0500
From:   Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:     Vipin Sharma <vipinsh@...gle.com>
Cc:     thomas.lendacky@....com, brijesh.singh@....com, jon.grimm@....com,
        eric.vantassell@....com, pbonzini@...hat.com, seanjc@...gle.com,
        lizefan@...wei.com, hannes@...xchg.org, frankja@...ux.ibm.com,
        borntraeger@...ibm.com, corbet@....net, joro@...tes.org,
        vkuznets@...hat.com, wanpengli@...cent.com, jmattson@...gle.com,
        tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de, hpa@...or.com,
        gingell@...gle.com, rientjes@...gle.com, dionnaglaze@...gle.com,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Patch v3 0/2] cgroup: KVM: New Encryption IDs cgroup controller

Hello,

Rough take after skimming:

* I don't have an overall objection. In terms of behavior, the only thing
  which stood out was input rejection depending on the current usage. The
  preferred way of handling that is rejecting future allocations rather than
  failing configuration as that makes it impossible e.g. to lower limit and
  drain existing usages from outside the container.

* However, the boilerplate to usefulness ratio doesn't look too good and I
  wonder whether what we should do is adding a generic "misc" controller
  which can host this sort of static hierarchical counting. I'll think more
  on it.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun