[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <95fca7d1-d473-e9e2-b6c8-c4ae3d44d2df@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2023 13:43:28 -0800
From: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>
To: Shawn Wang <shawnwang@...ux.alibaba.com>, <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
CC: <tglx@...utronix.de>, <mingo@...hat.com>, <bp@...en8.de>,
<dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, <james.morse@....com>,
<x86@...nel.org>, <hpa@...or.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/resctrl: Only show tasks' pids in current pid
namespace
Hi Shawn,
On 1/15/2023 11:12 PM, Shawn Wang wrote:
> When writing a task id to the "tasks" file in an rdtgroup,
> rdtgroup_tasks_write() treats the pid as a number in the current pid
> namespace. But when reading the "tasks" file, rdtgroup_tasks_show() shows
> the list of global pids from the init namespace. If current pid namespace
> is not the init namespace, pids in "tasks" will be confusing and incorrect.
>
> To be more robust, let the "tasks" file only show pids in the current pid
> namespace.
>
Is it possible to elaborate more on the use case that this is aiming to
address? It is unexpected to me that resource management is approached from
within a container. My expectation is that the resource management and monitoring
is done from the host.
> Signed-off-by: Shawn Wang <shawnwang@...ux.alibaba.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/rdtgroup.c | 8 ++++++--
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/rdtgroup.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/rdtgroup.c
> index 5993da21d822..9e97ae24c159 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/rdtgroup.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/rdtgroup.c
> @@ -718,11 +718,15 @@ static ssize_t rdtgroup_tasks_write(struct kernfs_open_file *of,
> static void show_rdt_tasks(struct rdtgroup *r, struct seq_file *s)
> {
> struct task_struct *p, *t;
> + pid_t pid;
>
> rcu_read_lock();
> for_each_process_thread(p, t) {
> - if (is_closid_match(t, r) || is_rmid_match(t, r))
> - seq_printf(s, "%d\n", t->pid);
> + if (is_closid_match(t, r) || is_rmid_match(t, r)) {
> + pid = task_pid_vnr(t);
> + if (pid)
> + seq_printf(s, "%d\n", pid);
> + }
> }
> rcu_read_unlock();
> }
This looks like it would solve the stated problem. Does it slow down
reading a tasks file in a measurable way?
Reinette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists