linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] cgroup: limit cgroup psi file writes to processes with CAP_SYS

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]

Message-ID: <CAJuCfpH=vEObrnSkqyk2BfeG0Jqgz2T4GxrS7=xJ3Ts2zj0A7w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 1 Mar 2023 11:36:58 -0800
From:   Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Cc:     tj@...nel.org, hannes@...xchg.org, lizefan.x@...edance.com,
        peterz@...radead.org, johunt@...mai.com, quic_sudaraja@...cinc.com,
        cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] cgroup: limit cgroup psi file writes to processes
 with CAP_SYS_RESOURCE

On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 10:40 AM Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 10:35 AM Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed 01-03-23 10:05:36, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > [...]
> > > Yes but hopefully my argument about keeping this and min period
> > > patches separate is reasonable?
> >
> > I am not questioning that. The practical advantage to squash the two
> > changes is that in case of the CAP_SYS_RESOURCE you do not have to
> > explicitly think about reverting the min constrain as well. I do not
> > think reverting one without the other is good.
>
> Ok, I'm fine with having both changes in the same patch. Will post v2
> later today. Thanks!

Didn't call it v2 since the title had to be changed. The new patch is
posted at: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230301193403.1507484-1-surenb@google.com/

>
> >
> > --
> > Michal Hocko
> > SUSE Labs