> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Weinberger [mailto:rich...@nod.at]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2014 8:52 PM
> To: Serge E. Hallyn
> Cc: Chen, Hanxiao/陈 晗霄; Eric W. Biederman; Serge Hallyn; Oleg Nesterov;
> contain...@lists.linux-foundation.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Mateusz
> Guzik; David Howells
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2v6] procfs: show hierarchy of pid namespace
>
> Am 05.11.2014 um 13:41 schrieb Serge E. Hallyn:
> > Quoting Richard Weinberger (rich...@nod.at):
> >> Am 05.11.2014 um 11:41 schrieb Chen Hanxiao:
> >>> We lack of pid hierarchy information, and this will lead to:
> >>> a) we don't know pids' relationship, who is whose child:
> >>> /proc/PID/ns/pid only tell us whether two pids live in different ns
> >>> b) bring trouble to nested lxc container check/restore/migration
> >>> c) bring trouble to pid translation between containers;
> >>>
> >>> This patch will show the hierarchy of pid namespace
> >>> by pidns_hierarchy like:
> >>>
> >>> [root@localhost ~]#cat /proc/pidns_hierarchy
> >>> 18060 18102 1534
> >>> 18060 18102 1600
> >>> 1550
> >>
> >> Hmm, what about printing the pid hierarchy in the same way as
> /proc/self/mountinfo
> >> does with mount namespaces?
> >> Your current approach is not bad but we should really try to be consistent
> with existing
> >> sources of information.
> >
> > Good point. How would you structure it to make it look mor elike mountinfo?
> > Adding the pidns inode number (in place of a mount sequence number) might be
> > useful, but it sounds like you have a more concrete idea?
>
> Just list <init_PID> <parent_of_init_PID>. This way we have exactly one
> information record per line and always exactly two columns to parse.
>
> e.g.
> [root@localhost ~]#cat /proc/pidns_hierarchy
> 1550 1
> 18060 1
> 18102 18060
> 1534 18102
> 1600 18102
>
But this style lacks of *level* information:
Ex:
1->18060->18102->1600->1700
If we want to check the 1700's level in pid ns
Style 1:
18060 18102 1600 1700
Style 2:
18060 1
18102 18060
1600 18102
1700 1600
If we had a little more containers,
Style 2 would not be clear enough.
1 line vs $(PID level) line
If there were no more related information to show,
I think style 1 looks better.
Thanks,
- Chen
> >> This function allocates memory per PID. If we have lots of PIDs, how does
> >> this
> scale?
> >> I'd go so far and say this can be a DoS'able issue if the pidns_hierarchy
> >> file
> is opened multiple times...
> >
> > It's not per pid, but per init-pid. For non-reaper pids he bails and
> > continue
> > through the loop a few lines above. This still may be DOS-able if users
> > don't
> > have kmem restrictions to prevent a ton of pid namespaces, but then the
> > namespaces themselves will take a lot more memory than the representation
> > here.
>
> Ah, I've overlooked that fact. If it is per init-pid it is not that bad. :-)
>
> Thanks,
> //richard
N�Р骒r��y����b�X�肚�v�^�)藓{.n�+�伐�{��赙zXФ�≤�}��财�z�&j:+v�����赙zZ+��+zf＂�h���~����i���z� �wア�?�ㄨ��&�)撷f��^j谦y�m��@A�a囤�
0鹅h���i
