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: <450A8B61.7040905@openvz.org>
Date:	Fri, 15 Sep 2006 15:15:45 +0400
From:	Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...nvz.org>
To:	sekharan@...ibm.com, balbir@...ibm.com, Srivatsa <vatsa@...ibm.com>
CC:	Kirill Korotaev <dev@...ru>, 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>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH] BC: resource beancounters (v4) (added	user
 memory)

Kirill Korotaev wrote:

[snip]
>> I have a C program that computes limits to obtain desired guarantees
>> in a single 'for (i = 0; i < n; n++)' loop for any given set of guarantees.
>> With all error handling, beautifull output, nice formatting etc it weights
>> only 60 lines.

Look at http://wiki.openvz.org/Containers/Guarantees_for_resources
I've described there how a guarantee can be get with limiting in details.

[snip]

>> I do not 'do not like guarantee'. I'm just sure that there are two ways
>> for providing guarantee (for unreclaimable resorces):
>> 1. reserving resource for group in advance
>> 2. limit resource for others
>> Reserving is worse as it is essentially limiting (you cut off 100Mb from
>> 1Gb RAM thus limiting the other groups by 900Mb RAM), but this limiting
>> is too strict - you _have_ to reserve less than RAM size. Limiting in
>> run-time is more flexible (you may create an overcommited BC if you
>> want to) and leads to the same result - guarantee.
> I think this deserves putting on Wiki.
> It is very good clear point.

This is also on the page I gave link at.
-
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/