OpenVZ Forum


Home » Mailing lists » Devel » [RFC][PATCH 0/4] Object creation with a specified id
Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/4] PID: use the target ID specified in procfs [message #28212 is a reply to message #28146] Tue, 11 March 2008 16:55 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Pavel Emelianov is currently offline  Pavel Emelianov
Messages: 1149
Registered: September 2006
Senior Member
Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Pavel Emelyanov (xemul@openvz.org):
>> Nadia Derbey wrote:
>>> Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
>>>> Nadia.Derbey@bull.net wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> @@ -122,14 +122,26 @@ static void free_pidmap(struct upid *upi
>>>>> 	atomic_inc(&map->nr_free);
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> -static int alloc_pidmap(struct pid_namespace *pid_ns)
>>>>> +static int alloc_pidmap(struct pid_namespace *pid_ns, struct pid_list *pid_l,
>>>>> +			int level)
>>>>> {
>>>>> 	int i, offset, max_scan, pid, last = pid_ns->last_pid;
>>>>> 	struct pidmap *map;
>>>>>
>>>>> -	pid = last + 1;
>>>>> -	if (pid >= pid_max)
>>>>> -		pid = RESERVED_PIDS;
>>>>> +	if (!pid_l) {
>>>>> +		pid = last + 1;
>>>>> +		if (pid >= pid_max)
>>>>> +			pid = RESERVED_PIDS;
>>>>> +	} else {
>>>>> +		/*
>>>>> +		 * There's a target pid, so use it instead
>>>>> +		 */
>>>>> +		BUG_ON(level < 0);
>>>>> +		pid = PID_AT(pid_l, level);
>>>>> +		if (pid >= pid_max)
>>>>> +			return -EINVAL;
>>>>> +	}
>>>>> +
>>>>> 	offset = pid & BITS_PER_PAGE_MASK;
>>>>> 	map = &pid_ns->pidmap[pid/BITS_PER_PAGE];
>>>>> 	max_scan = (pid_max + BITS_PER_PAGE - 1)/BITS_PER_PAGE - !offset;
>>>>> @@ -153,9 +165,16 @@ static int alloc_pidmap(struct pid_names
>>>>> 			do {
>>>>> 				if (!test_and_set_bit(offset, map->page)) {
>>>>> 					atomic_dec(&map->nr_free);
>>>>> -					pid_ns->last_pid = pid;
>>>>> +					if (!pid_l)
>>>>> +						pid_ns->last_pid = pid;
>>>>> +					else
>>>>> +						pid_ns->last_pid = max(last,
>>>>> +									pid);
>>>>> 					return pid;
>>>>> 				}
>>>>> +				if (pid_l)
>>>>> +					/* Target pid is already in use */
>>>>> +					return -EBUSY;
>>>>> 				offset = find_next_offset(map, offset);
>>>>> 				pid = mk_pid(pid_ns, map, offset);
>>>>> 			/*
>>>>> @@ -179,7 +198,7 @@ static int alloc_pidmap(struct pid_names
>>>>> 		}
>>>>> 		pid = mk_pid(pid_ns, map, offset);
>>>>> 	}
>>>>> -	return -1;
>>>>> +	return -ENOMEM;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> int next_pidmap(struct pid_namespace *pid_ns, int last)
>>>> As fas as this particular piece of code is concerned this all can 
>>>> be shrunk down to
>>>>
>>>> static int set_vpidmap(struct pid_namespace *ns, int pid)
>>>> {
>>>>         int offset;
>>>>         pidmap_t *map;
>>>>
>>>>         offset = pid & BITS_PER_PAGE_MASK;
>>>>         map = ns->pidmap + vpid / BITS_PER_PAGE;
>>>>
>>>>         if (unlikely(alloc_pidmap_page(map)))
>>>>                 return -ENOMEM;
>>>>
>>>>         if (test_and_set_bit(offset, map->page))
>>>>                 return -EEXIST;
>>>>
>>>>         atomic_dec(&map->nr_free);
>>>>         return pid;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> where the alloc_pidmap_page is a consolidated part of code from alloc_pidmap.
>>>>
>>>> And I'm scared of what the alloc_pid is going to become.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> It's true that I made alloc_pid() become uggly, but this patchset was 
>>> more intended to continue a discussion.
>>>
>>> What we could do is the following (not compiled, not tested...):
>>>
>>> struct pid *alloc_pid(struct pid_namespace *ns)
>>> {
>>>          struct pid *pid;
>>>          enum pid_type type;
>>>          int i, nr;
>>>          struct pid_namespace *tmp;
>>>          struct upid *upid;
>>>
>>>          pid = kmem_cache_alloc(ns->pid_cachep, GFP_KERNEL);
>>>          if (!pid) {
>>>                  pid = ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
>>>                  goto out;
>>>          }
>>>
>>>          tmp = ns;
>>>          i = ns->level;
>>>
>>>          if (current->next_id && (current->next_id->flag & SYS_ID_PID)) {
>>>                  tmp = set_predefined_pids(ns,
>>>                                current->next_id->pid_ids);
>>>                  if (IS_ERR(tmp)) {
>>>                          nr = PTR_ERR(tmp);
>>>                          goto out_free;
>>>                  }
>>>          }
>>>
>>>          /*
>>>           * Let the lower levels upid nrs be automatically allocated
>>>           */
>>>          for ( ; i >= 0; i--) {
>>>                  nr = alloc_pidmap(tmp, NULL, -1);
>>>                  if (nr < 0)
>>>                          goto out_free;
>>> ....
>>>
>>> which would only add a test and a function call to alloc_pid() ==> more 
>>> readable.
>>> with set_predefined_pids defined as follows (still not compiled, not 
>>> tested, ...):
>>>
>>> struct pid_namespace *set_predefined_pids(struct pid_namespace *ns,
>>>                                          struct pid_list *pid_l)
>>> {
>>>          int rel_level;
>>>
>>>          BUG_ON(!pid_l);
>>>
>>>          rel_level = pid_l->npids - 1;
>>>          if (rel_level > ns->level)
>>>                  return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
>>>
>>>          /*
>>>           * Use the predefined upid nrs for levels ns->level down to
>>>           * ns->level - rel_level
>>>           */
>>>          for ( ; rel_level >= 0; i--, rel_level--) {
>>>                  nr = alloc_pidmap(tmp, pid_l, rel_level);
>>>                  if (nr < 0)
>>>                          return ERR_PTR(nr);
>>>
>>>                  pid->numbers[i].nr = nr;
>>>                  pid->numbers[i].ns = tmp;
>>>                  tmp = tmp->parent;
>>>          }
>>>
>>>          current->next_id->flag &= ~SYS_ID_PID;
>>>          pids_free(pid_l);
>>>          current->next_id->pid_ids = NULL;
>>>
>>>          return tmp;
>>> }
>>>
>>>
>>> Don't you think that mixing this with your 1st proposal (the 
>>> set_vpidmap() one), would make things look better?
>> I'd prefer seeing
>>
>> --- a/kernel/pid.c
>> +++ b/kernel/pid.c
>> @@ -247,7 +247,7 @@ struct pid *alloc_pid(struct pid_namespace *ns)
>>  {
>>         struct pid *pid;
>>         enum pid_type type;
>> -       int i, nr;
>> +       int i, nr, req_nr;
>>         struct pid_namespace *tmp;
>>         struct upid *upid;
>>
>> @@ -257,7 +257,11 @@ struct pid *alloc_pid(struct pid_namespace *ns)
>>
>>         tmp = ns;
>>         for (i = ns->level; i >= 0; i--) {
>> -               nr = alloc_pidmap(tmp);
>> +               req_nr = get_required_pidnr(ns, i);
>> +               if (req_nr > 0)
>> +                       nr = set_pidmap(tmp, req_nr);
> 
> I assume you mean set_vpidmap(tmp, req_nr); here?

:) or however this one is called.

>> +               else
>> +                       nr = alloc_pidmap(tmp);
>>                 if (nr < 0)
>>                         goto out_free;
>>
>>
>> in alloc_pid() and not much than that.
> 
> So get_required_pidnr(ns, i) would do something like
> 
> int get_required_pidnr(struct pid_namespace *ns, int i)
> {
> 	if (current->next_id && (current->next_id->flag & SYS_ID_PID)) {                           
> 		pid_l = current->next_id->pid_ids;                                                 
> 		if (!pid_l) return 0;
> 		rel_level = pid_l->npids - 1;                                                      
> 		if (rel_level <= i)
> 			return PID_AT(pid_l, i);
> 	}
> 	return 0;
> }
> 
> ?

Well, yes, sort of. I haven't looked close to this part of patch,
but looks correct.

>>> Regards,
>>> Nadia
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Containers mailing list
>> Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org
>> https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
> 

_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: [PATCH 3/4] - v2 - IPC: use the target ID specified in procfs
Next Topic: [PATCH] Fix and allocate less memory for ->priv'less netdevices
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Tue Jul 01 17:04:58 GMT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.04947 seconds