Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 29 Aug 2022 14:59:57 +0200
From:   Michal =?iso-8859-1?Q?Koutn=FD?= <mkoutny@suse.com>
To:     Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Cgroups <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Aditya Kali <adityakali@google.com>,
        Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@canonical.com>,
        Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
        Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>,
        Muneendra Kumar <muneendra.kumar@broadcom.com>,
        Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] cgroup/bpf: Honor cgroup NS in cgroup_iter for
 ancestors
Message-ID: <20220829125957.GB3579@blackbody.suse.cz>
References: <20220826165238.30915-1-mkoutny@suse.com>
 <20220826165238.30915-5-mkoutny@suse.com>
 <CAJD7tkZZ6j6mPfwwFDy_ModYux5447HFP=oPwa6MFA_NYAZ9-g@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
        protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="kORqDWCi7qDJ0mEj"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAJD7tkZZ6j6mPfwwFDy_ModYux5447HFP=oPwa6MFA_NYAZ9-g@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Precedence: bulk


--kORqDWCi7qDJ0mEj
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 10:41:37AM -0700, Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com> wrote:
> I understand that currently cgroup_iter is the only user of this, but
> for future use cases, is it safe to assume that cgrp will always be
> inside ns? Would it be safer to do something like:

I preferred the simpler root_cgrp comparison to avoid pointer
arithmetics in cgroup_is_descendant. But I also made the assumption of
cgrp in ns.

Thanks, I'll likely adjust cgroup_path_ns to make it more robust for
an external cgrp.


I'd like to clarify, if a process A in a broad cgroup ns sets up a BPF
cgroup iterator, exposes it via bpffs and than a process B in a narrowed
cgroup ns (which excludes the origin cgroup) wants to traverse the
iterator, should it fail straight ahead (regardless of iter order)?
The alternative would be to allow self-dereference but prohibit any
iterator moves (regardless of order).


Thanks,
Michal

--kORqDWCi7qDJ0mEj
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iHUEARYIAB0WIQTrXXag4J0QvXXBmkMkDQmsBEOquQUCYwy4SQAKCRAkDQmsBEOq
uZX4AQDqrzGBoULhzyvm8GveGTXVJYAupuXli8zU2n5T8KXI1wEA/d5JS9XKNwTR
qMIafR6at0V6U72iM2jn2OX84ZgiKgk=
=auEQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--kORqDWCi7qDJ0mEj--