linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 5/8] Make writeout during reclaim cpuset aware

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, 17 Jan 2007 15:28:16 +1100
From:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
To:	Paul Jackson <pj@....com>
Cc:	clameter@....com, akpm@...l.org, menage@...gle.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, nickpiggin@...oo.com.au,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, dgc@....com
Subject: Re: [RFC 5/8] Make writeout during reclaim cpuset aware

On Wednesday 17 January 2007 15:20, Paul Jackson wrote:
> Andi wrote:
> > Is there a reason this can't be just done by node, ignoring the cpusets?
>
> This suggestion doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.
>
> We're looking to see if a task has dirtied most of the
> pages in the nodes it is allowed to use.  If it has, then
> we want to start pushing pages to the disk harder, and
> slowing down the tasks writes.
>
> What would it mean to do this per-node?  And why would
> that be better?

With a per node dirty limit you would get essentially the
same effect and it would have the advantage of helping
people who don't configure any cpusets but run on a NUMA 
system.

-Andi
-
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/