linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH] per-task I/O throttling

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: <661de9470801110759h318347acw5f08c91b48ca742d@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 11 Jan 2008 21:29:07 +0530
From:	"Balbir Singh" <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	righiandr@...rs.sourceforge.net
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Jens Axboe" <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] per-task I/O throttling

On Jan 11, 2008 4:15 AM, Andrea Righi <righiandr@...rs.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> Allow to limit the bandwidth of I/O-intensive processes, like backup
> tools running in background, large files copy, checksums on huge files,
> etc.
>
> This kind of processes can noticeably impact the system responsiveness
> for some time and playing with tasks' priority is not always an
> acceptable solution.
>
> This patch allows to specify a maximum I/O rate in sectors per second
> for each single process via /proc/<PID>/io_throttle (default is zero,
> that specify no limit).
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrea Righi <a.righi@...eca.it>

Hi, Andrea,

We have been thinking of doing control group based I/O control. I have
not reviewed your patch in detail. I can suggest looking at openvz's
IO controller. I/O bandwidth control is definitely interesting. How
did you test your solution?

Balbir
--
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/