mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: "Michal Koutný" <mkoutny@suse.com>
Cc: cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Zefan Li <lizefan.x@bytedance.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] cpuset: Allow setscheduler regardless of manipulated task
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2022 13:20:30 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YraNDoxU9IZaP3RV@mtj.duckdns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220623124944.2753-1-mkoutny@suse.com>

Hello,

On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 02:49:44PM +0200, Michal Koutný wrote:
> 1) The unified hierarchy attachment behavior -- is that the
>    right/consented model that migrated objects don't matter?

Yes.

> 2) If 1) is true, have I missed any danger in allowing cpuset'ing a
>    possibly privileged processes?

Given that the someone who has write perm on the cgroup or its
ancestors are allowed to change cpuset config itself, I have a hard
time imagining that check being all that useful as a security
mechanism.

> 2.2) cpuset may be in v2 mode even on v1 hierarchy with different
>    migration control rules (but checking migratee's creds in v1
>    eliminates effect of this patch).

Yeah, it should be fine to apply the change only to v2.

> 3) Alternative approach would be to allow cpuset migrations only when
>    nothing effectively changes (which is the case for parent->child
>    migration upon controller enablement).
> 
> 4) This is just idea draft, not tested in the real case.

Unless I'm missing something obvious, I don't see a reason to keep the
check, so please feel free to test and send a SOB'd patch.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

      parent reply	other threads:[~2022-06-25  4:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-06-23 12:49 Michal Koutný
2022-06-23 18:44 ` Waiman Long
2022-06-24 12:43   ` Michal Koutný
2022-06-25  4:20 ` Tejun Heo [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=YraNDoxU9IZaP3RV@mtj.duckdns.org \
    --to=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lizefan.x@bytedance.com \
    --cc=longman@redhat.com \
    --cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®