From: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>
Cc: io-uring@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Are CAP_SYS_ADMIN and CAP_SYS_NICE still needed for SQPOLL?
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2021 15:09:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210325140928.fuu2iap54ysevssz@steredhat> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <46016d10-7b87-c0f6-ed0f-18f89a2572d0@kernel.dk>
On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 08:02:45AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>On 3/25/21 7:44 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>> On 25/03/2021 11:33, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
>>> Hi Jens, Hi Pavel,
>>> I was taking a look at the new SQPOLL handling with io_thread instead of kthread. Great job! Really nice feature that maybe can be reused also in other scenarios (e.g. vhost).
>>>
>>> Regarding SQPOLL, IIUC these new threads are much closer to user threads, so is there still a need to require CAP_SYS_ADMIN and CAP_SYS_NICE to enable SQPOLL?
>>
>> Hmm, good question. If there are under same cgroup (should be in
>> theory), and if we add more scheduling points (i.e. need_resched()), and
>> don't see a reason why not. Jens?
>>
>> Better not right away though. IMHO it's safer to let the change settle
>> down for some time.
>
>Yes, agree on both counts - we are not going to need elevated privileges
>going forward, but I'd also rather defer making that change until 5.13
>so we have a bit more time on the current (new) base first.
Yeah, that makes sense to me!
Thank you both for the quick clarification,
Stefano
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-25 14:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-25 11:33 Are CAP_SYS_ADMIN and CAP_SYS_NICE still needed for SQPOLL? Stefano Garzarella
2021-03-25 13:44 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-03-25 14:02 ` Jens Axboe
2021-03-25 14:09 ` Stefano Garzarella [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20210325140928.fuu2iap54ysevssz@steredhat \
--to=sgarzare@redhat.com \
--cc=asml.silence@gmail.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=io-uring@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).