linux-kernel - Are CAP_SYS_ADMIN and CAP_SYS_NICE still needed for SQPOLL?

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20210325113322.ecnji3xejozqdpwt@steredhat>
Date:   Thu, 25 Mar 2021 12:33:22 +0100
From:   Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@...hat.com>
To:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
Cc:     io-uring@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Are CAP_SYS_ADMIN and CAP_SYS_NICE still needed for SQPOLL?

Hi Jens, Hi Pavel,
I was taking a look at the new SQPOLL handling with io_thread instead of 
kthread. Great job! Really nice feature that maybe can be reused also in 
other scenarios (e.g. vhost).

Regarding SQPOLL, IIUC these new threads are much closer to user 
threads, so is there still a need to require CAP_SYS_ADMIN and 
CAP_SYS_NICE to enable SQPOLL?

Thanks,
Stefano