On 09.12.20 21:58, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, > > Rough take after skimming: > > * I don't have an overall objection. In terms of behavior, the only thing > which stood out was input rejection depending on the current usage. The > preferred way of handling that is rejecting future allocations rather than > failing configuration as that makes it impossible e.g. to lower limit and > drain existing usages from outside the container. > > * However, the boilerplate to usefulness ratio doesn't look too good and I > wonder whether what we should do is adding a generic "misc" controller > which can host this sort of static hierarchical counting. I'll think more > on it.
We first dicussed to have encryption_ids.stat encryption_ids.max encryption_ids.current and we added the sev in later, so that we can also have tdx, seid, sgx or whatever. Maybe also 2 or more things at the same time. Right now this code has encryption_ids.sev.stat encryption_ids.sev.max encryption_ids.sev.current And it would be trivial to extend it to have encryption_ids.seid.stat encryption_ids.seid.max encryption_ids.seid.current on s390 instead (for our secure guests). So in the end this is almost already a misc controller, the only thing that we need to change is the capability to also define things other than encryption.*.* And of course we would need to avoid adding lots of random garbage to such a thing. But if you feel ok with the burden to keep things kind of organized a misc controller would certainly work for the encryption ID usecase as well. So I would be fine with the thing as is or a misc controlĺer. Christian
