[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YMs5ssb50B208Aad@dell>
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2021 13:01:54 +0100
From: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Zefan Li <lizefan.x@...edance.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, cgroups@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] cgroup-v1: Grant CAP_SYS_NICE holders permission to
move tasks between cgroups
Hi Tejun,
Thanks for your reply.
On Thu, 17 Jun 2021, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 10:09:41AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > It should be possible for processes with CAP_SYS_NICE capabilities
> > (privileges) to move lower priority tasks within the same namespace to
> > different cgroups.
>
> I'm not sure that "should" is justified that easily given that cgroup can
> affect things like device access permissions and basic system organization.
The latter part of that sentence does provide some additional caveats.
> > One extremely common example of this is Android's 'system_server',
> > which moves processes around to different cgroups/cpusets, but should
> > not require any other root privileges.
>
> Why is this being brought up now after all the years?
This has been discussed before?
I didn't find any evidence of that on the lists.
> Isn't android moving onto cgroup2 anyway?
That I would have to check.
--
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Senior Technical Lead - Developer Services
Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
Powered by blists - more mailing lists