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: <45090D9E.9000903@in.ibm.com>
Date:	Thu, 14 Sep 2006 13:36:54 +0530
From:	Balbir Singh <balbir@...ibm.com>
To:	Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...nvz.org>
Cc:	sekharan@...ibm.com, Srivatsa <vatsa@...ibm.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	CKRM-Tech <ckrm-tech@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
	Dave Hansen <haveblue@...ibm.com>,
	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,
	Matt Helsley <matthltc@...ibm.com>,
	Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...l.ru>,
	Kirill Korotaev <dev@...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)

Pavel Emelianov wrote:

> I don't understand your idea. Limit does _not_ imply anything - it's
> just a limit.
> You may limit anything to anyone w/o bothering the consequences.
> Guarantee implies that the resource you guarantee will be available and
> this "will be" is something not that easy.
> 
> So I repeat my question - how can you be sure that these X megabytes you
> guarantee to some group won't be used by others so that you won't be able
> to reclaim them?
> 
> 

May be we can treat a guarantee as a soft guarantee. A soft
guarantee would imply that when a group needs its guaranteed resources, the
system makes its best effort to make it available.

In soft guarantees, resources not actively used by a group can be shared with
other groups.

Hard guarantees would probably require reserving the resource in advance and
sharing of the resources not used, with other groups, might not be possible.

Comments?

-- 

	Balbir Singh,
	Linux Technology Center,
	IBM Software Labs
-
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/