linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] CPU hard limits

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Fri, 5 Jun 2009 13:27:55 +0800
From:	Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
Cc:	bharata@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Dhaval Giani <dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>,
	Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ibm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux Containers <containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	Herbert Poetzl <herbert@...hfloor.at>
Subject: Re: [RFC] CPU hard limits

* Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com> [2009-06-05 08:21:43]:

> Balbir Singh wrote:
>>> But then there is no other way to make a *guarantee*, guarantees come
>>> at a cost of idling resources, no? Can you show me any other
>>> combination that will provide the guarantee and without idling the
>>> system for the specified guarantees?
>>>     
>>
>> OK, I see part of your concern, but I think we could do some
>> optimizations during design. For example if all groups have reached
>> their hard-limit and the system is idle, should we do start a new hard
>> limit interval and restart, so that idleness can be removed. Would
>> that be an acceptable design point?
>
> I think so.  Given guarantees G1..Gn (0 <= Gi <= 1; sum(Gi) <= 1), and a  
> cpu hog running in each group, how would the algorithm divide resources?
>

As per the matrix calculation, but as soon as we reach an idle point,
we redistribute the b/w and start a new quantum so to speak, where all
groups are charged up to their hard limits.

For your question, if there is a CPU hog running, it would be as per
the matrix calculation, since the system has no idle point during the
bandwidth period.

-- 
	Balbir
--
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/