[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALAqxLUkqSAEiHE038w+ZGUmhPgj2SpG7BLcPrrtU46VYcO=KA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 21:39:38 -0800
From: John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>,
Daniel Mack <daniel@...que.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, kafai@...com,
Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>,
Harald Hoyer <harald@...hat.com>,
Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Sargun Dhillon <sargun@...gun.me>,
Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
"open list:CONTROL GROUP (CGROUP)" <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>,
Android Kernel Team <kernel-team@...roid.com>,
Rom Lemarchand <romlem@...roid.com>,
Colin Cross <ccross@...roid.com>,
Dmitry Shmidt <dimitrysh@...gle.com>,
Todd Kjos <tkjos@...gle.com>,
Christian Poetzsch <christian.potzsch@...tec.com>,
Amit Pundir <amit.pundir@...aro.org>,
Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
"Serge E . Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RESEND][PATCH v4] cgroup: Use CAP_SYS_RESOURCE to allow a
process to migrate other tasks between cgroups
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 10:23 AM, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 10:13:53AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> > Delegation is an explicit operation and reflected in the ownership of
>> > the subdirectories and cgroup interface files in them. The
>> > subhierarchy containment is achieved by requiring the user who's
>> > trying to migrate a process to have write perm on cgroup.procs on the
>> > common ancestor of the source and target in addition to the target.
>>
>> OK, I see what you're doing. That's interesting.
>
> It's something born out of usages of cgroup v1. People used it that
> way (chowning files and directories) and combined with the uid checksn
> it yielded something which is useful sometimes, but it always had
> issues with hierarchical behaviors, which files to chmod and the weird
> combination of uid checks. cgroup v2 has a clear delegation model but
> the uid checks are still left in as not changing was the default.
>
> It's not necessary and I'm thinking about queueing something like the
> following in the next cycle.
>
> As for the android CAP discussion, I think it'd be nice to share an
> existing CAP but if we can't find a good one to share, let's create a
> new one.
So just to clarify the discussion for my purposes and make sure I
understood, per-cgroup CAP rules was not desired, and instead we
should either utilize an existing cap (are there still objections to
CAP_SYS_RESOURCE? - this isn't clear to me) or create a new one (ie,
bring back the older CAP_CGROUP_MIGRATE patch).
Tejun: Do you have a more finished version of your patch that I should
add my changes on top of?
thanks
-john
Powered by blists - more mailing lists