linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cgroup: limit block I/O bandwidth

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 18 Jan 2008 14:02:49 +0100 (MET)
From:	Andrea Righi <righiandr@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To:	Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>
Cc:	Dhaval Giani <dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cgroup: limit block I/O bandwidth

Paul Menage wrote:
> On Jan 18, 2008 7:36 AM, Dhaval Giani <dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 12:41:03PM +0100, Andrea Righi wrote:
>>> Allow to limit the block I/O bandwidth for specific process containers
>>> (cgroups) imposing additional delays on I/O requests for those processes
>>> that exceed the limits defined in the control group filesystem.
>>>
>>> Example:
>>>   # mkdir /dev/cgroup
>>>   # mount -t cgroup -oio-throttle io-throttle /dev/cgroup
>> Just a minor nit, can't we name it as io, keeping in mind that other
>> controllers are known as cpu and memory?
> 
> Or maybe "blockio"?

Agree, blockio seems better. Not all I/O is performed on block devices
and in this case we're considering block devices only.

-Andrea
--
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/