Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/6] sysvmsg: containerize

[Chris Wright]

* Dave Hansen (haveblue@xxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-03-06 at 17:57 -0800, Chris Wright wrote:
> > * Dave Hansen (haveblue@xxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> > > -void __init msg_init (void)
> > > +void __init msg_init (struct ipc_msg_context *context)
> > >  {
> > > -	ipc_init_ids(&msg_ids,msg_ctlmni);
> > > +	ipc_init_ids(&context->ids,msg_ctlmni);
> > >  	ipc_init_proc_interface("sysvipc/msg",
> > >  				"       key      msqid perms      cbytes       qnum lspid lrpid   uid   gid  cuid  cgid      stime      rtime      ctime\n",
> > > -				&msg_ids,
> > > +				&context->ids,
> > >  				sysvipc_msg_proc_show);
> > 
> > Does that mean /proc interface only gets init_task context?
> > Along those lines, I think now ipcs -a is incomplete from admin
> > perspective.  Suppose that's a feature from the container/vserver
> > POV.
> 
> It will get context from the current task, which means the current
> container.  We haven't quite decided how these things will be (or if
> they need to be) aggregated on a a system-wide basis.

The /proc interface is registering with &context->ids of init_task.  So,
all other contexts using that interface will be looking at the wrong
info, AFAICT.

As you can tell my concerns are in resource consumption.  If a user can
create contexts which it can hide from sysadmin, and they aren't subject
to sysadmin mandated resource limits, it's effectively a leak, esp. since
these resources don't die with exit(2).

thanks,
-chris
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/