On 03/19/2014 10:54 PM, Joe Gordon wrote:
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 9:25 AM, Miguel Angel Ajo <majop...@redhat.com
<mailto:majop...@redhat.com>> wrote:
An advance on the changes that it's requiring to have a
py->c++ compiled rootwrap as a mitigation POC for havana/icehouse.
https://github.com/mangelajo/__shedskin.rootwrap/commit/__e4167a6491dfbc71e2d0f6e28ba93b__c8a1dd66c0
<https://github.com/mangelajo/shedskin.rootwrap/commit/e4167a6491dfbc71e2d0f6e28ba93bc8a1dd66c0>
The current translation output is included.
It looks like doable (almost killed 80% of the translation problems),
but there are two big stones:
1) As Joe said, no support for Subprocess (we're interested in popen),
I'm using a dummy os.system() for the test.
2) No logging support.
I'm not sure on how complicated could be getting those modules
implemented for shedkin.
Before sorting out of we can get those working under shedskin, any
preliminary performance numbers from neutron when using this?
Sure, totally agree.
I'm trying to put up a conversion without 1 & 2, to run a benchmark on
it, and then I'll post the results.
I suppose, we couldn't use it in neutron itself without Popen support
(not sure) but at least I could get an estimate out of the previous
numbers and the new ones.
Best,
Miguel Ángel.
On 03/18/2014 09:14 AM, Miguel Angel Ajo wrote:
Hi Joe, thank you very much for the positive feedback,
I plan to spend a day during this week on the
shedskin-compatibility
for rootwrap (I'll branch it, and tune/cut down as necessary) to
make
it compile under shedskin [1] : nothing done yet.
It's a short-term alternative until we can have a rootwrap
agent,
together with it's integration in neutron (for Juno). As, for the
compiled rootwrap, if it works, and if it does look good
(security wise)
then we'd have a solution for Icehouse/Havana.
help in [1] is really welcome ;-) I'm available in
#openstack-neutron
as 'ajo'.
Best regards,
Miguel Ángel.
[1] https://github.com/mangelajo/__shedskin.rootwrap
<https://github.com/mangelajo/shedskin.rootwrap>
On 03/18/2014 12:48 AM, Joe Gordon wrote:
On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 1:46 AM, Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo
<mangel...@redhat.com <mailto:mangel...@redhat.com>
<mailto:mangel...@redhat.com <mailto:mangel...@redhat.com>>>
wrote:
I have included on the etherpad, the option to write a sudo
plugin (or several), specific for openstack.
And this is a test with shedskin, I suppose that in
more complicated
dependecy scenarios it should perform better.
[majopela@redcylon tmp]$ cat <<EOF >test.py
> import sys
> print "hello world"
> sys.exit(0)
> EOF
[majopela@redcylon tmp]$ time python test.py
hello world
real 0m0.016s
user 0m0.015s
sys 0m0.001s
This looks very promising!
A few gotchas:
* Very limited library support
https://code.google.com/p/__shedskin/wiki/docs#Library___Limitations
<https://code.google.com/p/shedskin/wiki/docs#Library_Limitations>
* no logging
* no six
* no subprocess
* no *args support
*
https://code.google.com/p/__shedskin/wiki/docs#Python___Subset_Restrictions
<https://code.google.com/p/shedskin/wiki/docs#Python_Subset_Restrictions>
that being said I did a quick comparison with great results:
$ cat tmp.sh
#!/usr/bin/env bash
echo $0 $@
ip a
$ time ./tmp.sh foo bar> /dev/null
real 0m0.009s
user 0m0.003s
sys 0m0.006s
$ cat tmp.py
#!/usr/bin/env python
import os
import sys
print sys.argv
print os.system("ip a")
$ time ./tmp.py foo bar > /dev/null
min:
real 0m0.016s
user 0m0.004s
sys 0m0.012s
max:
real 0m0.038s
user 0m0.016s
sys 0m0.020s
shedskin tmp.py && make
$ time ./tmp foo bar > /dev/null
real 0m0.010s
user 0m0.007s
sys 0m0.002s
Based in these results I think a deeper dive into making
rootwrap
supportshedskin is worthwhile.
[majopela@redcylon tmp]$ shedskin test.py
*** SHED SKIN Python-to-C++ Compiler 0.9.4 ***
Copyright 2005-2011 Mark Dufour; License GNU GPL
version 3 (See
LICENSE)
[analyzing types..]
******************************__**100%
[generating c++ code..]
[elapsed time: 1.59 seconds]
[majopela@redcylon tmp]$ make
g++ -O2 -march=native -Wno-deprecated -I.
-I/usr/lib/python2.7/site-__packages/shedskin/lib
/tmp/test.cpp
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-__packages/shedskin/lib/sys.cpp
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-__packages/shedskin/lib/re.cpp
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-__packages/shedskin/lib/builtin.__cpp -lgc
-lpcre -o test
[majopela@redcylon tmp]$ time ./test
hello world
real 0m0.003s
user 0m0.000s
sys 0m0.002s
----- Original Message -----
> We had this same issue with the dhcp-agent. Code was
added that
paralleled
> the initial sync here:
https://review.openstack.org/#__/c/28914/
<https://review.openstack.org/#/c/28914/>
that made
> things a good bit faster if I remember correctly.
Might be worth
doing
> something similar for the l3-agent.
>
> Best,
>
> Aaron
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 5:07 PM, Joe Gordon <
joe.gord...@gmail.com <mailto:joe.gord...@gmail.com>
<mailto:joe.gord...@gmail.com
<mailto:joe.gord...@gmail.com>> > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 3:57 PM, Joe Gordon <
joe.gord...@gmail.com <mailto:joe.gord...@gmail.com>
<mailto:joe.gord...@gmail.com
<mailto:joe.gord...@gmail.com>> > wrote:
>
>
>
> I looked into the python to C options and haven't
found anything
promising
> yet.
>
>
> I tried Cython, and RPython, on a trivial hello
world app, but
git similar
> startup times to standard python.
>
> The one thing that did work was adding a '-S' when
starting
python.
>
> -S Disable the import of the module site and the
site-dependent
manipulations
> of sys.path that it entails.
>
> Using 'python -S' didn't appear to help in devstack
>
> #!/usr/bin/python -S
> # PBR Generated from u'console_scripts'
>
> import sys
> import site
>
site.addsitedir('/mnt/stack/__oslo.rootwrap/oslo/rootwrap')
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I am not sure if we can do that for rootwrap.
>
>
> jogo@dev:~/tmp/pypy-2.2.1-src$ time ./tmp-c
> hello world
>
> real 0m0.021s
> user 0m0.000s
> sys 0m0.020s
> jogo@dev:~/tmp/pypy-2.2.1-src$ time ./tmp-c
> hello world
>
> real 0m0.021s
> user 0m0.000s
> sys 0m0.020s
> jogo@dev:~/tmp/pypy-2.2.1-src$ time python -S ./tmp.py
> hello world
>
> real 0m0.010s
> user 0m0.000s
> sys 0m0.008s
>
> jogo@dev:~/tmp/pypy-2.2.1-src$ time python -S ./tmp.py
> hello world
>
> real 0m0.010s
> user 0m0.000s
> sys 0m0.008s
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 3:26 PM, Miguel Angel Ajo
Pelayo <
> mangel...@redhat.com <mailto:mangel...@redhat.com>
<mailto:mangel...@redhat.com <mailto:mangel...@redhat.com>>
> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Carl, thank you, good idea.
>
> I started reviewing it, but I will do it more
carefully tomorrow
morning.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > All,
> >
> > I was writing down a summary of all of this and
decided to just
do it
> > on an etherpad. Will you help me capture the big
picture
there? I'd
> > like to come up with some actions this week to try
to address
at least
> > part of the problem before Icehouse releases.
> >
> >
https://etherpad.openstack.__org/p/neutron-agent-exec-__performance
<https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/neutron-agent-exec-performance>
> >
> > Carl
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 5:26 AM, Miguel Angel Ajo <
majop...@redhat.com <mailto:majop...@redhat.com>
<mailto:majop...@redhat.com <mailto:majop...@redhat.com>> >
> > wrote:
> > > Hi Yuri & Stephen, thanks a lot for the
clarification.
> > >
> > > I'm not familiar with unix domain sockets at low
level, but ,
I wonder
> > > if authentication could be achieved just with
permissions
(only users in
> > > group "neutron" or group "rootwrap" accessing
this service.
> > >
> > > I find it an interesting alternative, to the
other proposed
solutions,
> > > but
> > > there are some challenges associated with this
solution,
which could make
> > > it
> > > more complicated:
> > >
> > > 1) Access control, file system permission based
or token
based,
> > >
> > > 2) stdout/stderr/return encapsulation/forwarding
to the
caller,
> > > if we have a simple/fast RPC mechanism we can
use, it's a
matter
> > > of serializing a dictionary.
> > >
> > > 3) client side implementation for 1 + 2.
> > >
> > > 4) It would need to accept new domain socket
connections in
green threads
> > > to
> > > avoid spawning a new process to handle a new
connection.
> > >
> > > The advantages:
> > > * we wouldn't need to break the only-python-rule.
> > > * we don't need to rewrite/translate rootwrap.
> > >
> > > The disadvantages:
> > > * it needs changes on the client side (neutron +
other
projects),
> > >
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Miguel Ángel.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 03/08/2014 07:09 AM, Yuriy Taraday wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Stephen Gran
> > >> < stephen.g...@theguardian.com
<mailto:stephen.g...@theguardian.com>
<mailto:stephen.gran@__theguardian.com
<mailto:stephen.g...@theguardian.com>> <mailto:
stephen.g...@theguardian.com
<mailto:stephen.g...@theguardian.com>
<mailto:stephen.gran@__theguardian.com
<mailto:stephen.g...@theguardian.com>> >>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> Given that Yuriy says explicitly 'unix socket',
I dont
think he
> > >> means 'MQ' when he says 'RPC'. I think he just
means a daemon
> > >> listening on a unix socket for execution
requests. This
seems like
> > >> a reasonably sensible idea to me.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Yes, you're right.
> > >>
> > >> On 07/03/14 12:52, Miguel Angel Ajo wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> I thought of this option, but didn't consider
it, as It's
somehow
> > >> risky to expose an RPC end executing
priviledged (even
filtered)
> > >> commands.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> subprocess module have some means to do RPC
securely over
UNIX sockets.
> > >> I does this by passing some token along with
messages. It
should be
> > >> secure because with UNIX sockets we don't need
anything
stronger since
> > >> MITM attacks are not possible.
> > >>
> > >> If I'm not wrong, once you have credentials for
messaging,
you can
> > >> send messages to any end, even filtered, I
somehow see
this as a
> > >> higher
> > >> risk option.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> As Stephen noted, I'm not talking about using
MQ for RPC.
Just some
> > >> local UNIX socket with very simple RPC over it.
> > >>
> > >> And btw, if we add RPC in the middle, it's
possible that all
those
> > >> system call delays increase, or don't decrease
all it'll be
> > >> desirable.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Every call to rootwrap would require the following.
> > >>
> > >> Client side:
> > >> - new client socket;
> > >> - one message sent;
> > >> - one message received.
> > >>
> > >> Server side:
> > >> - accepting new connection;
> > >> - one message received;
> > >> - one fork-exec;
> > >> - one message sent.
> > >>
> > >> This looks like way simpler than passing
through sudo and
rootwrap that
> > >> requires three exec's and whole lot of
configuration files
opened and
> > >> parsed.
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >>
> > >> Kind regards, Yuriy.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> _________________________________________________
> > >> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> > >> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.__org
<mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
<mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.__openstack.org
<mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org>>
> > >>
http://lists.openstack.org/__cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/__openstack-dev
<http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev>
> > >>
> > >
> > > _________________________________________________
> > > OpenStack-dev mailing list
> > > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.__org
<mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
<mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.__openstack.org
<mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org>>
> > >
http://lists.openstack.org/__cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/__openstack-dev
<http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev>
> >
> > _________________________________________________
> > OpenStack-dev mailing list
> > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.__org
<mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
<mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.__openstack.org
<mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org>>
> >
http://lists.openstack.org/__cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/__openstack-dev
<http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev>
> >
>
> _________________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.__org
<mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
<mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.__openstack.org
<mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org>>
>
http://lists.openstack.org/__cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/__openstack-dev
<http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.__org
<mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
<mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.__openstack.org
<mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org>>
>
http://lists.openstack.org/__cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/__openstack-dev
<http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.__org
<mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
<mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.__openstack.org
<mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org>>
>
http://lists.openstack.org/__cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/__openstack-dev
<http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev>
>
_________________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.__org
<mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
<mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.__openstack.org
<mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org>>
http://lists.openstack.org/__cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/__openstack-dev
<http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev>
_________________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.__org
<mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
http://lists.openstack.org/__cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/__openstack-dev
<http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev>
_________________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.__org
<mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
http://lists.openstack.org/__cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/__openstack-dev
<http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev>
_________________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.__org
<mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
http://lists.openstack.org/__cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/__openstack-dev
<http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev>
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
