netdev - Re: [PATCH v3 6/7] tcp buffer limitation: per-cgroup limit

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:	Wed, 28 Sep 2011 07:59:31 +0530
From:	Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc:	Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, paul@...lmenage.org,
	lizf@...fujitsu.com, kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com,
	ebiederm@...ssion.com, davem@...emloft.net, gthelen@...gle.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, kirill@...temov.name
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/7] tcp buffer limitation: per-cgroup limit

On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 10:28 PM, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> wrote:
> Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com> writes:
>
>> This patch uses the "tcp_max_mem" field of the kmem_cgroup to
>> effectively control the amount of kernel memory pinned by a cgroup.
>>
>> We have to make sure that none of the memory pressure thresholds
>> specified in the namespace are bigger than the current cgroup.
>
> I noticed that some other OS known by bash seem to have a rlimit per
> process for this. Would that make sense too? Not sure how difficult
> your infrastructure would be to extend to that.

rlimit per process for tcp usage? Interesting, that reminds me, we
need to revisit rlimit (RSS) at some point

Balbir Singh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html