On 27 May 2015 at 12:22, Zefan Li <lizefan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 2015/5/27 6:07, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote: >> Add a kernel API to send a proc connector notification that a cgroup >> has become empty. A userspace daemon can then act upon such >> information, and usually clean-up and remove such a group as it's no >> longer needed. >> >> Currently there are two other ways (one for current & one for unified >> cgroups) to receive such notifications, but they either involve >> spawning userspace helper or monitoring a lot of files. This is a >> firehose of all such events instead from a single place. >> >> In the current cgroups structure the way to get notifications is by >> enabling `release_agent' and setting `notify_on_release' for a given >> cgroup hierarchy. This will then spawn userspace helper with removed >> cgroup as an argument. It has been acknowledged that this is >> expensive, especially in the exit-heavy workloads. In userspace this >> is currently used by systemd and CGmanager that I know of, both of >> agents establish connection to the long running daemon and pass the >> message to it. As a courtesy to other processes, such an event is >> sometimes forwarded further on, e.g. systemd forwards it to the system >> DBus. >> >> In the future/unified cgroups structure support for `release_agent' is >> removed, without a direct replacement. However, there is a new >> `cgroup.populated' file exposed that recursively reports if there are >> any tasks in a given cgroup hierarchy. It's a very good flag to >> quickly/lazily scan for empty things, however one would need to >> establish inotify watch on each and every cgroup.populated file at >> cgroup setup time (ideally before any pids enter said cgroup). Thus >> again anybody else, but the original creator of a given cgroup, has a >> chance to reliably monitor cgroup becoming empty (since there is no >> reliable recursive inotify watch). >> >> Hence, the addition to the proc connector firehose. Multiple things, >> albeit with a CAP_NET_ADMIN in the init pid/user namespace), could >> connect and monitor cgroups release notifications. In a way, this >> repeats udev history, at first it was a userspace helper, which later >> became a netlink socket. And I hope, that proc connector is a >> naturally good fit for this notification type. >> >> For precisely when cgroups should emit this event, see next patch >> against kernel/cgroup.c. >> > > We really don't want yet another way for cgroup notification. > we do have multiple information sources for similar events in other places... e.g. fork events can be tracked with ptrace and with proc-connector, ditto other things. > Systemd is happy with this cgroup.populated interface. Do you have any > real use case in mind that can't be satisfied with inotify watch? > cgroup.populated is not implemented in systemd and would require a lot of inotify watches. Also it's only set on the unified structure and not exposed on the current one. Also it will not allow anybody else to establish notify watch in a timely manner. Thus anyone external to the cgroups creator will not be able to monitor cgroup.populated at the right time. With proc_connector I was thinking processes entering cgroups would be useful events as well, but I don't have a use-case for them yet thus I'm not sure how the event should look like. Would cgroup.populated be exposed on the legacy cgroup hierchy? At the moment I see about ~20ms of my ~200ms boot wasted on spawning the cgroups agent and I would like to get rid of that as soon as possible. This patch solves it for me. ( i have a matching one to connect to proc connector and then feed notifications to systemd via systemd's private api end-point ) Exposing cgroup.populated irrespective of the cgroup mount options would be great, but would result in many watches being established awaiting for a once in a lifecycle condition of a cgroup. Imho this is wasteful, but nonetheless will be much better than spawning the agent. Would a patch that exposes cgroup.populated on legacy cgroup structure be accepted? It is forward-compatible afterall... or no? -- Regards, Dimitri. Pura Vida! https://clearlinux.org Open Source Technology Center Intel Corporation (UK) Ltd. - Co. Reg. #1134945 - Pipers Way, Swindon SN3 1RJ. -- 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
