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:   Tue, 28 Mar 2023 17:41:56 +0200
From:   Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
To:     Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc:     Zefan Li <lizefan.x@bytedance.com>, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gscrivan@redhat.com
Subject: Re: CLONE_INTO_CGROUP probably needs to call controller attach
 handlers
Message-ID: <20230328154156.kcm4nha2jeej74rr@wittgenstein>
References: <20230328153943.op62j3sw7qaixdsq@wittgenstein>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230328153943.op62j3sw7qaixdsq@wittgenstein>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 05:39:52PM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote:
> Hey,
> 
> Giuseppe reported that the the affinity mask isn't updated when a
> process is spawned directly into the target cgroup via
> CLONE_INTO_CGROUP. However, migrating a process will cause the affinity
> mask to be updated (see the repro at [1].
> 
> I took a quick look and the issue seems to be that we don't call the
> various attach handlers during CLONE_INTO_CGROUP whereas we do for
> migration. So the solution seems to roughly be that we need to call the
> various attach handlers during CLONE_INTO_CGROUP as well when the
> parent's cgroups is different from the child cgroup. I think we need to
> call all of them, can, cancel and attach.
> 
> The plumbing here might be a bit intricate since the arguments that the
> fork handlers take are different from the attach handlers.

But note, as Johannes already pointed out somewhere else, that there's
probably a lot of code that doesn't apply to the CLONE_INTO_CGROUP case
so it might also make sense to just move the missing pieces into the
fork handlers.