Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] clone3: allow spawning processes into cgroups

Christian Brauner
2020-01-16T23:57:22Z

On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 07:10:49PM +0100, Christian Brauner wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 05:01:02PM +0100, Michal Koutný wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 07:15:03AM +0100, Christian Brauner <christian.brauner-GeWIH/nMZzLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> > > This adds support for creating a process in a different cgroup than its
> > > parent.
> > Binding fork and migration together looks useful.
> >
> > > --- a/kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c
> > > @@ -5882,21 +5882,176 @@ void cgroup_fork(struct task_struct *child)
> > > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&child->cg_list);
> > Just a nitpick, I noticed the comment for cgroup_fork should be updated
> > too (generic migration happens in cgroup_post_fork).
>
> Thanks.
>
> >
> > > --- a/kernel/fork.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/fork.c
> > > [...]
> > > @@ -2279,8 +2278,7 @@ static __latent_entropy struct task_struct *copy_process(
> > > write_unlock_irq(&tasklist_lock);
> > >
> > > proc_fork_connector(p);
> > > - cgroup_post_fork(p);
> > > - cgroup_threadgroup_change_end(current);
> > > + cgroup_post_fork(current, p, args);
> > I can see that when CLONE_INTO_CGROUP | CLONE_NEWCGROUP is passed, then
> > the child's cgroup NS will be rooted at parent's css set
> > (copy_namespaces precedes cgroup_post_fork).
> >
> > Wouldn't it make better sense if this flags combination resulted in
> > child's NS rooted in its css set?
>
> I need to take a closer look but it sounds like we should move the
> copying of the cgroup namespace to a later point; but again I need to
> look into this.

Ok, this is way simpler I think, we just set the root_cset of the new
cgroup namespace to the child's cset in cgroup_post_fork() if
CLONE_NEWCGROUP is requested.

Christian