From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@engr.sgi.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: Fix sys_migrate_pages: Move all pages when invoked from root
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 16:57:41 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0602241649530.24668@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060224164733.6d5224a5.akpm@osdl.org>
On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, Andrew Morton wrote:
> What a strange interface. One would expect the syscall to pass in an arg
> saying "move my pages" or "move all pages", and then permission checking
> will either do that or it will reject it.
Another approach is to say that the migrate_pages() call moves the pages
it is allowed to. A user should not move pages of other processes whereas
root is expected to be able to do everything. Migrate means migrate
whatever you can because the pages are on the wrong nodes. And a regular
user can only move his own stuff.
A detailed control over page migration is possible via the mbind()
function call. Hmmm... Although adding some flag to sys_migrate_pages
would allow more flexibility for root and may also allow other flags in
the fture.
> As it stands, programs will silently behave differently depending upon
> whether root ran them, which is silly.
The processes affected will still run correctly and the user may only
notice a performance difference.
> Also, this check from a few lines earlier:
>
> /*
> * Check if this process has the right to modify the specified
> * process. The right exists if the process has administrative
> * capabilities, superuser priviledges or the same
> * userid as the target process.
> */
> if ((current->euid != task->suid) && (current->euid != task->uid) &&
> (current->uid != task->suid) && (current->uid != task->uid) &&
> !capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN)) {
> err = -EPERM;
> goto out;
> }
>
> appears to be a) somewhat duplicative of your patch and b) a heck of a lot
> better way of determining whether to use MF_MOVE versus MF_MOVE_ALL.
Huh? This only checks the permission for allow a process to start
migration another process. It does not define the scope of actions.
How could this determine if a user would be allowed to move all pages?
If a user would be allowed to move all pages then he could move f.e.
glibc or ldso pages (these are heavily shared) to a bad location affecting
the performance of the processes of other users on the system.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-02-25 0:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-02-25 0:17 Christoph Lameter
2006-02-25 0:47 ` Andrew Morton
2006-02-25 0:57 ` Christoph Lameter [this message]
2006-02-25 1:15 ` Andrew Morton
2006-02-25 1:27 ` Christoph Lameter
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.64.0602241649530.24668@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com \
--to=clameter@engr.sgi.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox