On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 05:53:33PM +0800, Chen Hanxiao wrote:
> This patch will show the hierarchy of pid namespace
> by /proc/pidns_hierarchy like:
>
> [root@localhost ~]#cat /proc/pidns_hierarchy
> /proc/18060/ns/pid /proc/18102/ns/pid /proc/1534/ns/pid
> /proc/18060/ns/pid /proc/18102/ns/pid /proc/1600/ns/pid
> /proc/1550/ns/pid
>
I don't really know the area, just had a quick look and the patch does
not seem right.
> +/*
> + * /proc/pidns_hierarchy
> + * show the hierarchy of pid namespace
> + */
> +
> +#define NS_HIERARCHY "pidns_hierarchy"
> +
> +static LIST_HEAD(pidns_list);
> +static LIST_HEAD(pidns_tree);
> +static DEFINE_MUTEX(pidns_list_lock);
> +
> +/* list for host pid collection */
> +struct pidns_list {
> + struct list_head list;
> + struct pid *pid;
> +};
> +
> +static void free_pidns_list(struct list_head *head)
> +{
> + struct pidns_list *tmp, *pos;
> +
> + list_for_each_entry_safe(pos, tmp, head, list) {
> + list_del(&pos->list);
> + kfree(pos);
> + }
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Only add init pid in different namespaces
> + */
> +static int
> +pidns_list_really_add(struct pid *pid, struct list_head *list_head)
> +{
> + struct pidns_list *tmp, *pos;
> +
> + if (!is_child_reaper(pid))
> + return 0;
> +
> + list_for_each_entry_safe(pos, tmp, list_head, list)
> + if (ns_of_pid(pid) == ns_of_pid(pos->pid))
> + return 0;
> +
> + return 1;
> +}
> +
> +static int
> +pidns_list_add(struct pid *pid, struct list_head *list_head)
> +{
> + struct pidns_list *ent;
> +
> + ent = kmalloc(sizeof(*ent), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!ent)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
A call from proc_pidns_list_refresh will enter with rcu read-locked.
Is it really ok to sleep in such case?
> + ent->pid = pid;
> + if (pidns_list_really_add(pid, list_head))
> + list_add_tail(&ent->list, list_head);
> +
Does not this leak memory if pidns_list_really_add returns 0?
Also, you just add stuff to the list and don't ref it in any way, so for
instance in proc_pidns_list_refresh below...
> +static void
> +pidns_list_filter(void)
> +{
> + struct pidns_list *tmp, *pos;
> + struct pidns_list *tmp_t, *pos_t;
> + struct pid_namespace *ns0, *ns1;
> + struct pid *pid0, *pid1;
> + int flag = 0;
> +
> + /* screen pid with relationship
> + * in pidns_list, we may add pids like
> + * ns0 ns1 ns2
> + * pid1->pid2->pid3
> + * we should keep pid3 and screen pid1, pid2
> + */
> + list_for_each_entry_safe(pos, tmp, &pidns_list, list) {
> + list_for_each_entry_safe(pos_t, tmp_t, &pidns_list, list) {
At this point maybe it would be beneficial to have a list of children
namespaces in pid_namespace?
> + flag = 0;
> + pid0 = pos->pid;
> + pid1 = pos_t->pid;
> + ns0 = pid0->numbers[pid0->level].ns;
> + ns1 = pid1->numbers[pid1->level].ns;
> + if (pos->pid->level < pos_t->pid->level)
> + for (; ns1 != NULL; ns1 = ns1->parent)
> + if (ns0 == ns1) {
> + flag = 1;
> + break;
> + }
> + if (flag == 1)
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + if (flag == 0)
> + pidns_list_add(pos->pid, &pidns_tree);
> + }
> +
> + free_pidns_list(&pidns_list);
> +}
> +
> +/* collect pids in pidns_list,
> + * then remove duplicated ones,
> + * add the rest to pidns_tree
> + */
> +static void proc_pidns_list_refresh(void)
> +{
> + struct pid *pid;
> + struct task_struct *p;
> +
> + /* collect pid in differet ns */
> + rcu_read_lock();
> + for_each_process(p) {
> + pid = task_pid(p);
> + if (pid && (pid->level > 0))
> + pidns_list_add(pid, &pidns_list);
> + }
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> +
> + /* screen duplicate pids */
> + pidns_list_filter();
What makes it safe to traverse the list after rcu_read_unlock?
> +}
> +
> +static int nslist_proc_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
> +{
> + struct pidns_list *tmp, *pos;
> + struct pid_namespace *ns, *curr_ns;
> + struct pid *pid;
> + char pid_buf[32];
> + int i, curr_level;
> +
> + curr_ns = task_active_pid_ns(current);
> +
> + mutex_lock(&pidns_list_lock);
> + proc_pidns_list_refresh();
> +
So this reiterates everything for each open? Maybe a generation counter
could be employed here to avoid unnecessary work.
> + /* print pid namespace hierarchy */
> + list_for_each_entry_safe(pos, tmp, &pidns_tree, list) {
> + pid = pos->pid;
> + curr_level = -1;
> + ns = pid->numbers[pid->level].ns;
> + /* Check whether pid has relationship with current ns */
> + for (; ns != NULL; ns = ns->parent)
> + if (ns == curr_ns)
> + curr_level = curr_ns->level;
> +
> + if (curr_level == -1)
> + continue;
> +
> + for (i = curr_level + 1; i <= pid->level; i++) {
> + ns = pid->numbers[i].ns;
> + /* PID 1 in specific pid ns */
> + snprintf(pid_buf, 32, "/proc/%u/ns/pid",
> + pid_vnr(find_pid_ns(1, ns)));
> + seq_printf(m, "%s ", pid_buf);
> + }
> +
> + seq_putc(m, '\n');
> + }
> +
> + free_pidns_list(&pidns_tree);
> + mutex_unlock(&pidns_list_lock);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
--
Mateusz Guzik
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
