linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] cgroup: add cpu.stat

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]

Date:   Wed, 12 Jan 2022 17:55:05 -0800
From:   Josh Don <joshdon@...gle.com>
To:     Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Zefan Li <lizefan.x@...edance.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
        Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
        cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, haoluo@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] cgroup: add cpu.stat_percpu

Hi Tejun,

On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 12:24 PM Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 03:38:20PM -0800, Josh Don wrote:
> > Is the concern there just the extra overhead from making multiple
> > trips into this handler and re-allocating the buffer until it is large
> > enough to take all the output? In that case, we could pre-allocate
> > with a size of the right order of magnitude, similar to /proc/stat.
> >
> > Lack of per-cpu stats is a gap between cgroup v1 and v2, for which v2
> > can easily support this interface given that it already tracks the
> > stats percpu internally. I opted to dump them all in a single file
> > here, to match the consolidation that occurred from cpuacct->cpu.stat.
>
> Yeah, nack on this. That part was dropped intentionally. These text pseudo
> files aren't a great medium for this sort of (potentially large) data dump
> and they scale really badly with new fields which we may want to expose in
> the future. For detailed introspection, a better route would be using bpf
> and if that's inconvenient for some reason trying to make them more
> convenient.

Fair enough. Apart from needing to expose an rstat flush mechanism to
BPF, the main issues that come to mind are conveniently associating
with a particular cgroup, and allowing non-root to collect stats
independently. Hao's patch series
(https://lkml.kernel.org/r/%3C20220112192547.3054575-1-haoluo@google.com%3E)
makes this particularly convenient, but that's a topic for a separate
conversation :)