| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 10:46:37 +0100 From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> To: Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu Cc: righiandr@...rs.sourceforge.net, Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com> Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] per-task I/O throttling On Fri, 2008-01-11 at 23:57 -0500, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu wrote: > On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 17:32:49 +0100, Andrea Righi said: > > > The interesting feature is that it allows to set a priority for each > > process container, but AFAIK it doesn't allow to "partition" the > > bandwidth between different containers (that would be a nice feature > > IMHO). For example it would be great to be able to define per-container > > limits, like assign 10MB/s for processes in container A, 30MB/s to > > container B, 20MB/s to container C, etc. > > Has anybody considered allocating based on *seeks* rather than bytes moved, > or counting seeks as "virtual bytes" for the purposes of accounting (if the > disk can do 50mbytes/sec, and a seek takes 5millisecs, then count it as 100K > of data)? I was considering a time scheduler, you can fill your time slot with seeks or data, it might be what CFQ does, but I've never even read the code. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists