re: sysctl(7) knob to allow users to control CPU affinity

[matthew green <mrg%eterna.com.au@localhost>]

> > Here's a proposal for a sysctl(7) knob to easily allow non-superusers to 
> > set the CPU affinity of processes and threads they own:
> > 
> > security.secmodel.suser.usersetaffinity
> > 
> > (ressembles the one already existing to allow for user mounts)
> > 
> > Would it be acceptable to modify current secmodel_suser(9) to allow this?
> > 
> > This issue comes regularly on various tech-* MLs, motivated by the fact 
> > that people expect this behavior based on what they encounter on other OS.

i like this idea.  i didn't read the patch.

> Just out of curiosity, but is it possible for the superuser to still
> reserve wanted CPU/cores, such that non-privileged users could, if that
> sysctl is enabled, work with the non-reserved ones?  Or, can the
> sysadmin specify CPU/cores and/or limits for non-privileged users?
> 
> Since the default is to not allow affinity control, it's not of utmost
> importance, but it could allow a compromise between total restriction
> and total freedom...  I have no objection to that sysctl personally.

i think the default should be changed, but user-specified affinity
shouldn't be considered an absolute rule, just a preference.  i'm not
sure i understand exactly what sort of issue you're envisioning.


.mrg.