linux-kernel - Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH v3] sched: automated per tty task groups

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:	Sat, 20 Nov 2010 14:02:32 -0800
From:	Konstantin Svist <fry.kun@...il.com>
To:	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
CC:	Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@...ppelsdorf.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH v3] sched: automated per tty task groups

On 11/20/2010 11:51 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-11-20 at 20:33 +0100, Jesper Juhl wrote:
>> On Mon, 15 Nov 2010, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 2:41 PM,<Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu>  wrote:
>>>> So the set of all tasks that never call proc_set_tty() ends up in the same one
>>>> big default group, correct?
>>> Well, yes and no.
>>>
>>> Yes, that's what the code currently does. But I did ask Mike (and he
>>> delivered) to try to make the code look and work in a way where the
>>> whole "tty thing" is just one of the heuristics.
>>>
>>> It's not clear exactly what the non-tty heuristics would be, but I do
>>> have a few suggestions:
>>>
>>>   -  I think it might be a good idea to associate a task group with the
>>> current "cred" of a process, and fall back on it in the absense of a
>>> tty-provided one.
>>>
>> Or how about (just brainstorming here) a group per 'process group'?
> I switched to per session, which on my system at least looks like more
> than enough granularity

Will that have an effect on software like Chromium which creates a fork 
for each tab? If a user opens Thunderbird and Chromium with 100 tabs, 
Thunderbird should probably get 50% CPU time instead of just 1%...

--
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/