| 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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:29:17 -0700 (PDT) From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com> To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, miklos@...redi.hu, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, neilb@...e.de, dgc@....com, tomoki.sekiyama.qu@...achi.com, nikita@...sterfs.com, trond.myklebust@....uio.no, yingchao.zhou@...il.com, richard@....demon.co.uk, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, pj@....com Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/23] per device dirty throttling -v9 Is there any way to make the global limits on which the dirty rate calculations are based cpuset specific? A process is part of a cpuset and that cpuset has only a fraction of memory of the whole system. And only a fraction of that fraction can be dirtied. We do not currently enforce such limits which can cause the amount of dirty pages in cpusets to become excessively high. I have posted several patchsets that deal with that issue. See http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/1/16/5 It seems that limiting dirty pages in cpusets may be much easier to realize in the context of this patchset. The tracking of the dirty pages per node is not necessary if one would calculate the maximum amount of dirtyable pages in a cpuset and use that as a base, right? - 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists