Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752008AbaDUPDQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Apr 2014 11:03:16 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:39599 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751287AbaDUPDN (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Apr 2014 11:03:13 -0400 Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2014 11:03:07 -0400 From: Vivek Goyal To: Andy Lutomirski Cc: Simo Sorce , Daniel J Walsh , David Miller , Tejun Heo , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , lpoetter@redhat.com, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, kay@redhat.com, Network Development Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] net: Implement SO_PASSCGROUP to enable passing cgroup path Message-ID: <20140421150307.GA4367@redhat.com> References: <20140417171256.GB25334@redhat.com> <1397756025.2628.64.camel@willson.li.ssimo.org> <1397759013.2628.86.camel@willson.li.ssimo.org> <20140417185023.GA32527@redhat.com> <1397761817.2628.113.camel@willson.li.ssimo.org> <20140417191646.GA2461@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 12:46:22PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 12:16 PM, Vivek Goyal wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 03:10:17PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote: > > > > [..] > >> At this point I think journald people need to give a little bit more > >> details on how they plan to use SO_PASSCGROUP. > >> > >> For my use cases I care only about streams and SO_PEERCGROUP that does > >> not have any of the (perceived) issues of SO_PASSCGROUP. > > > > Ok, so we agree that SO_PEERCGROUP is not a problem. And it solves the > > problem for some of the use cases. > > > > And there is lot of contention on the SO_PASSCGROUP option. > > > > So how about taking one step at a time. Get SO_PEERCGROUP in first and > > then get into more details on how SO_PASSCGROUP will exactly be used and > > then decide what to do. > > My only objection to SO_PEERCGROUP is that I don't believe that a > legitimate use case exists. I think the feature itself is safe to > add. So what happened to logger use case where logger accepts stream connections and logs the cgroup of client too. W.r.t systemd, looks like journald is accepting connections at /run/systemd/journal/stdout. (stdout_stream_new() and server_open_stdout_socket()). Thanks Vivek -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/