On 06/23/2017 12:58 AM, Lawrence Brakmo wrote: [...]
Daniel, I see value for having a global program, so I would like to keep that. When this patchset is accepted, I will submit one that adds support for per cgroup sock_ops programs, with the option to use the global one if none is specified for a cgroup. We could also have the option of the cgroup sock_ops program choosing if the global program should run for a particular op based on its return value. We can iron it out the details when that patch is submitted.
Hm, could you elaborate on the value part compared to per cgroups ops? My understanding is that per cgroup would already be a proper superset of just the global one anyway, so why not going with that in the first place since you're working on it? What would be the additional value? How would global vs per cgroup one interact with each other in terms of enforcement e.g., there's already semantics in place for cgroups descendants, would it be that we set TCP parameters twice or would you disable the global one altogether? Just wondering as you could avoid these altogether with going via cgroups initially. Thanks, Daniel
