Re: [PATCH] capabilities: add capability cgroup controller
From: Tejun Heo
Date: Fri Jun 24 2016 - 13:24:56 EST
Hello, Serge.
On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 11:59:10AM -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > Just monitoring is less jarring than implementing security enforcement
> > via cgroup, but it is still jarring. What's wrong with recursive
> > process hierarchy monitoring which is in line with the whole facility
> > is implemented anyway?
>
> As I think Topi pointed out, one shortcoming is that if there is a short-lived
> child task, using its /proc/self/status is racy. You might just miss that it
> ever even existed, let alone that the "application" needed it.
But the parent can collect whatever its children used. We already do
that with other stats.
Thanks.
--
tejun