On 2013/1/21 17:21, John Fastabend wrote:
> On 01/21/2013 01:01 AM, Li Zefan wrote:
>> On 2013/1/21 16:50, Daniel Wagner wrote:
>>> Hi Li,
>>>
>>> On 21.01.2013 07:08, Li Zefan wrote:
>>>> I'm not a network developer, so correct me if I'm wrong.
>>>>
>>>> Since commit 7955490f732c2b8
>>>> ("net: netprio_cgroup: rework update socket logic"), sock->sk->sk_cgrp_prioidx
>>>> is set when the socket is created, and won't be updated unless the task is
>>>> moved to another cgroup.
>>>>
>>>> Now the problem is, a socket can be _shared_ by multiple processes (fork, SCM_RIGHT).
>>>> If we place those processes in different cgroups, and each cgroup has
>>>> different configs, but all of the processes will send data via this socket
>>>> with the same network priority.
>>>
>>> Wouldn't that be addressed by 48a87cc26c13b68f6cce4e9d769fcb17a6b3e4b8
>>>
>>> net: netprio: fd passed in SCM_RIGHTS datagram not set correctly
>>>
>>> A socket fd passed in a SCM_RIGHTS datagram was not getting
>>> updated with the new tasks cgrp prioidx. This leaves IO on
>>> the socket tagged with the old tasks priority.
>>>
>>> To fix this add a check in the scm recvmsg path to update the
>>> sock cgrp prioidx with the new tasks value.
>>>
>>> As I read this this should work for net_prio.
>>>
>>
>> But after process A passed the socket fd to B, both A and B can use the
>> same socket to send data, right? Then if A and B were placed in different
>> cgroups with differnt configs, A's config won't take effect anymore.
>>
>> Am I missing something?
>>
>>
>
> Hi Zefan,
>
> Neil and I discusses this here, http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/172343/
> look towards the bottom of the thread. Quoted here.
>
So this is a known issue. Why not document this behavior in
Documentation/cgroups/netprio.txt?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cgroups" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
