linux-kernel - Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH] BC: resource beancounters (v4) (added user memory)

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]

Message-ID: <45011B2A.6000102@openvz.org>
Date:	Fri, 08 Sep 2006 11:26:34 +0400
From:	Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...nvz.org>
To:	sekharan@...ibm.com
CC:	Kirill Korotaev <dev@...ru>, Dave Hansen <haveblue@...ibm.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	CKRM-Tech <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 Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>,
	Matt Helsley <matthltc@...ibm.com>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...l.ru>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH] BC: resource beancounters (v4) (added user
 memory)

Chandra Seetharaman wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-09-07 at 11:29 +0400, Pavel Emelianov wrote:
> <snip>
>
>   
>>>> BUT: I remind you the talks at OKS/OLS and in previous UBC discussions.
>>>> It was noted that having a separate interfaces for CPU, I/O bandwidth
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> But, it will be lot simpler for the user to configure/use if they are
>>> together. We should discuss this also.
>>>   
>>>       
>> IMHO such unification may only imply that one syscall is used to pass
>> configuration info into kernel.
>> Each controller has specific configurating parameters different from the
>> other ones. E.g. CPU controller must assign a "weight" to each group to
>> share CPU time accordingly, but what is a "weight" for memory controller?
>> IO may operate on "bandwidth" and it's not clear what is a "bandwidth" in
>> Kb/sec for CPU controller and so on.
>>     
>
> CKRM/RG handles this by eliminating the units from the interface and
> abstracting them to be "shares". Each resource controller converts the
> shares to its own units and handles properly. 
>   
That's what I'm talking about - common syscall/ioct/etc and each controller
parses its input itself. That's OK for us.

[snip]
-
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/