Re: [PATCH 3/9] Containers (V9): Add tasks file interface

From: Balbir Singh
Date: Tue May 01 2007 - 14:13:08 EST


+static int attach_task_by_pid(struct container *cont, char *pidbuf)
+{
+ pid_t pid;
+ struct task_struct *tsk;
+ int ret;
+
+ if (sscanf(pidbuf, "%d", &pid) != 1)
+ return -EIO;
+
+ if (pid) {
+ read_lock(&tasklist_lock);

You could just use rcu_read_lock() and rcu_read_unlock() instead
of read_lock(&tasklist_lock) and read_unlock(&tasklist_lock).

+
+ tsk = find_task_by_pid(pid);
+ if (!tsk || tsk->flags & PF_EXITING) {
+ read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
+ return -ESRCH;
+ }
+
+ get_task_struct(tsk);
+ read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
+
+ if ((current->euid) && (current->euid != tsk->uid)
+ && (current->euid != tsk->suid)) {
+ put_task_struct(tsk);
+ return -EACCES;
+ }
+ } else {
+ tsk = current;
+ get_task_struct(tsk);
+ }
+
+ ret = attach_task(cont, tsk);
+ put_task_struct(tsk);
+ return ret;
+}
+
/* The various types of files and directories in a container file system */

typedef enum {
@@ -684,6 +789,54 @@ typedef enum {
FILE_TASKLIST,
} container_filetype_t;

+static ssize_t container_common_file_write(struct container *cont,
+ struct cftype *cft,
+ struct file *file,
+ const char __user *userbuf,
+ size_t nbytes, loff_t *unused_ppos)
+{
+ container_filetype_t type = cft->private;
+ char *buffer;
+ int retval = 0;
+
+ if (nbytes >= PATH_MAX)
+ return -E2BIG;
+
+ /* +1 for nul-terminator */
+ if ((buffer = kmalloc(nbytes + 1, GFP_KERNEL)) == 0)
+ return -ENOMEM;
+
+ if (copy_from_user(buffer, userbuf, nbytes)) {
+ retval = -EFAULT;
+ goto out1;
+ }
+ buffer[nbytes] = 0; /* nul-terminate */
+
+ mutex_lock(&container_mutex);
+
+ if (container_is_removed(cont)) {
+ retval = -ENODEV;
+ goto out2;
+ }

Can't we make this check prior to kmalloc() and copy_from_user()?



+int container_task_count(const struct container *cont) {
+ int count = 0;
+ struct task_struct *g, *p;
+ struct container_subsys_state *css;
+ int subsys_id;
+ get_first_subsys(cont, &css, &subsys_id);
+
+ read_lock(&tasklist_lock);

Can be replaced with rcu_read_lock() and rcu_read_unlock()

+ do_each_thread(g, p) {
+ if (task_subsys_state(p, subsys_id) == css)
+ count ++;
+ } while_each_thread(g, p);
+ read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
+ return count;
+}
+
+static int pid_array_load(pid_t *pidarray, int npids, struct container *cont)
+{
+ int n = 0;
+ struct task_struct *g, *p;
+ struct container_subsys_state *css;
+ int subsys_id;
+ get_first_subsys(cont, &css, &subsys_id);
+ rcu_read_lock();
+ read_lock(&tasklist_lock);

The read_lock() and read_unlock() are redundant

+
+ do_each_thread(g, p) {
+ if (task_subsys_state(p, subsys_id) == css) {
+ pidarray[n++] = pid_nr(task_pid(p));
+ if (unlikely(n == npids))
+ goto array_full;
+ }
+ } while_each_thread(g, p);
+
+array_full:
+ read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
+ rcu_read_unlock();
+ return n;
+}
+
[snip]

+static int container_tasks_open(struct inode *unused, struct file *file)
+{
+ struct container *cont = __d_cont(file->f_dentry->d_parent);
+ struct ctr_struct *ctr;
+ pid_t *pidarray;
+ int npids;
+ char c;
+
+ if (!(file->f_mode & FMODE_READ))
+ return 0;
+
+ ctr = kmalloc(sizeof(*ctr), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!ctr)
+ goto err0;
+
+ /*
+ * If container gets more users after we read count, we won't have
+ * enough space - tough. This race is indistinguishable to the
+ * caller from the case that the additional container users didn't
+ * show up until sometime later on.
+ */
+ npids = container_task_count(cont);
+ pidarray = kmalloc(npids * sizeof(pid_t), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!pidarray)
+ goto err1;
+
+ npids = pid_array_load(pidarray, npids, cont);
+ sort(pidarray, npids, sizeof(pid_t), cmppid, NULL);
+
+ /* Call pid_array_to_buf() twice, first just to get bufsz */
+ ctr->bufsz = pid_array_to_buf(&c, sizeof(c), pidarray, npids) + 1;
+ ctr->buf = kmalloc(ctr->bufsz, GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!ctr->buf)
+ goto err2;
+ ctr->bufsz = pid_array_to_buf(ctr->buf, ctr->bufsz, pidarray, npids);
+
+ kfree(pidarray);
+ file->private_data = ctr;
+ return 0;
+
+err2:
+ kfree(pidarray);
+err1:
+ kfree(ctr);
+err0:
+ return -ENOMEM;
+}
+

Any chance we could get a per-container task list? It will
help subsystem writers as well. Alternatively, subsystems
could use the attach_task() callback to track all tasks,
but a per-container list will avoid duplication.



--
Warm Regards,
Balbir Singh
Linux Technology Center
IBM, ISTL
-
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/