2009/8/24 Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxx>
> Krzysztof Taraszka wrote:
>
>> 2009/8/24 Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxx>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Krzysztof Taraszka wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> 2009/8/24 Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxx>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Krzysztof Taraszka wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> 2009/8/24 Daniel Lezcano <dlezcano@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Krzysztof Taraszka wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2009/8/24 Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxx>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Krzysztof Taraszka wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2009/8/23 Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxx>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> (...)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> With the lxc tools I did:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> lxc-execute -n foo /bin/bash
>>>>>>>>>>> echo 268435456 > /cgroup/foo/memory.limit_in_bytes
>>>>>>>>>>> mount --bind /cgroup/foo/memory.meminfo /proc/meminfo
>>>>>>>>>>> for i in $(seq 1 100); do sleep 3600 & done
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> (...)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> :)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> hmmm... I think that access to the cgroup inside container is
>>>>>>>>>>> very
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> risk
>>>>>>>>>> because I am able to manage for example memory resources (what if
>>>>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>>> am
>>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>>> the host owner and... I can give me via non-secure mounted /cgroup
>>>>>>>>>> (inside
>>>>>>>>>> container) all available memory resources...).
>>>>>>>>>> I think that the /proc/meminfo should be pass to the container in
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> other
>>>>>>>>>> way, but this is the topic for the other thread.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It is not a problem, I did it in this way because it's easy to
>>>>>>>>>> test
>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>> a real use case, the memory limit is setup by the lxc configuration
>>>>>>>>> file
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>> the cgroup directory will be no longer accessible from the
>>>>>>>>> container.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So.. how there will be another method (more secure) for giving
>>>>>>>> /proc/meminfo
>>>>>>>> with limits to the container, right?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Same method. The lxc tools can be configured with a fstab to mount
>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>> mount points, furthermore if memory.meminfo is available I will add
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> code
>>>>>>> to mount it automatically to /proc/meminfo in the lxc tools.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hmm... setup_fs() from lxc_init.c or another way?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> No, I was thinking in the setup_cgroup() function in conf.c.
>>>>>
>>>>> Something like:
>>>>>
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>> if (!access("/var/lib/lxc/mycontainer/nsgroup/memory.meminfo"), F_OK) {
>>>>> mount("/var/lib/lxc/mycontainer/nsgroup/memory.meminfo",
>>>>> "/proc/meminfo",
>>>>> MS_BIND, ...);
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> but a bit more clean :)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> hmm... ok, got it, but don't know why does it won't work ;)
>>>>
>>>> @@ -999,12 +999,14 @@
>>>> static int setup_cgroup(const char *name)
>>>> {
>>>> char filename[MAXPATHLEN];
>>>> + char meminfofilename[MAXPATHLEN];
>>>> char line[MAXPATHLEN];
>>>> struct stat s;
>>>> int ret;
>>>>
>>>> snprintf(filename, MAXPATHLEN, LXCPATH "/%s/cgroup", name);
>>>> -
>>>> + snprintf(meminfofilename, MAXPATHLEN, LXCPATH
>>>> "/%s/nsgroup/memory.meminfo", name);
>>>> +
>>>> if (stat(filename, &s)) {
>>>> SYSERROR("failed to stat '%s'", filename);
>>>> return -1;
>>>> @@ -1024,6 +1026,10 @@
>>>>
>>>> INFO("cgroup has been setup");
>>>>
>>>> + /* mount memory.meminfo as /proc/meminfo */
>>>> + if (!access(meminfofilename, F_OK)) {
>>>> + mount(meminfofilename, "/proc/meminfo", "none", MS_BIND, 0);
>>>> + }
>>>> return 0;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> hmm... any idea Daniel? :)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Yep, can you check the return code of the mount call and return an error
>>> ?
>>> if (mount(....)) {
>>> SYSERROR("failed to mount '%s' to '/proc/meminfo'", meminfofilename);
>>> return -1;
>>> }
>>> at least to verify if this does not fail.
>>> and maybe add an INFO trace if the mount is successful saying
>>> "/proc/meminfo" is setup with the cgroup.
>>>
>>> ps : you should launch the command with the "-l INFO" to see the message.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Hmmm....
>> i think that I know where the problem might be:
>>
>> look here:
>>
>> lxc1:~# cat debin.log
>> lxc-start 1251109397.922 INFO lxc_conf - tty's configured
>> lxc-start 1251109397.922 INFO lxc_start - 'debian' is initialized
>> lxc-start 1251109397.974 INFO lxc_conf - 'debian' hostname has
>> been setup
>> lxc-start 1251109397.975 INFO lxc_conf - network has been setup
>> lxc-start 1251109397.976 INFO lxc_conf - cgroup has been setup
>> lxc-start 1251109397.976 INFO lxc_conf - /proc/meminfo is setup
>> with the cgroup
>> lxc-start 1251109397.976 INFO lxc_conf - mount points have been
>> setup
>> lxc-start 1251109397.976 INFO lxc_conf - console '/dev/pts/1'
>> mounted to '/usr/local/var/lib/lxc/debian/rootfs/dev/console'
>> lxc-start 1251109397.977 INFO lxc_conf - 4 tty(s) has been setup
>> lxc-start 1251109397.977 INFO lxc_conf - chrooted to
>> '/usr/local/var/lib/lxc/debian/rootfs'
>> lxc-start 1251109397.977 INFO lxc_conf - created new pts instance
>> lxc-start 1251109397.977 NOTICE lxc_conf - 'debian' is setup.
>> lxc-start 1251109397.977 NOTICE lxc_start - exec'ing '/sbin/init'
>> lxc-start 1251109397.978 NOTICE lxc_start - '/sbin/init' started
>> with pid '24339'
>>
>> i think that /proc/meminfo should be mounted after /proc . why? i think
>> that, because mounting /proc may override /proc/meminfo
>> Am I right? :)
>>
>>
> Ha ! haha ! arrgh ! no way ! You are right :/
>
Hehe ;)
>
> In the case of application container, lxc mounts /proc but in the case of
> system container it is the system who do that so after the /proc/meminfo has
> been mounted.
>
> Maybe we can look at modifying fs/proc/meminfo.c instead. Let me do a small
> patch for the kernel...
>
>
Okey. I am waiting for your patch :)
--
Krzysztof Taraszka
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
