linux-kernel - Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC][PATCH] UBC: user resource beancounters

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:	Thu, 24 Aug 2006 16:48:28 -0700
From:	Chandra Seetharaman <sekharan@...ibm.com>
To:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc:	rohitseth@...gle.com, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	ckrm-tech@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Andrey Savochkin <saw@...ru>, devel@...nvz.org,
	hugh@...itas.com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Kirill Korotaev <dev@...ru>, Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...nvz.org>
Subject: Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC][PATCH] UBC: user resource beancounters

On Thu, 2006-08-24 at 12:10 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> Ar Mer, 2006-08-23 am 19:04 -0700, ysgrifennodd Chandra Seetharaman:
> > > A single centralized structure that has fields that are mostly used by
> > > every one should be okay I think.
> > 
> > You mean to say definition like
> > 
> > struct user_beancounter {
> > 	fields;/* fields that exists now */
> > 	
> > 	int kmemsize_ctlr_info1;
> > 	char *kmemsize_ctlr_info2;
> > 
> > 	char *oomguar_ctlr_info1;
> > 	char *oomguar_ctlr_info2;
> > 
> > 	/* and so on */
> > }
> > 
> > is the right thing to do ? even though oomguar controller doesn't care
> > about kmemsize_ctlr_info* etc.,
> 
> 
> All you need is
> 
> struct wombat_controller
> {
> 	struct user_beancounter counter;
> 	void (*wombat_pest_control)(struct wombat *w);
> 	atomic_t wombat_population;
> 	int (*wombat_destructor)(struct wombat *w);
> };

This may not solve the problem, as 
 - we won't be able get the controller data structure given the
   beancounter data structure. 
 - we need to keep the data in sync (since there are multiple copies).
 - we will be copying the whole beancounter data structure needlessly
   (the controller might care only about _its_ parameters).

I agree with you that this can be added later when needed. The problem I
see is that this might need some change in the core data structure which
might face more resistance (than it does now :) once it is in mainline.

> 
> and just embed the counter in whatever you are controlling. The point of
> the beancounters themselves is to be *SIMPLE*. It's unfortunate that
> some folk seem obsessed with extending them for a million theoretical
> projects rather than getting them in and working and then extending them
> for real projects. Please lets not have another EVMS.
> 
> Alan
> 
-- 

----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Chandra Seetharaman               | Be careful what you choose....
              - sekharan@...ibm.com   |      .......you may get it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------


-
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/