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: Wed, 05 Mar 2008 10:17:47 +0300 From: "Denis V. Lunev" <den@...allels.com> To: Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com> Cc: Dhaval Giani <dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, fedora-devel-list@...hat.com, opensuse-packaging@...nsuse.org, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Sudhir Kumar <skumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> Subject: Re: [Devel] Re: [RFC] libcg: design and plans On Tue, 2008-03-04 at 22:15 -0800, Paul Menage wrote: > Hi Dhaval, > > On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 7:23 AM, Dhaval Giani <dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > We have been working on a library for control groups which would provide > > simple APIs for programmers to utilize from userspace and make use of > > control groups. > > > > We are still designing the library and the APIs. I've attached the > > design (as of now) to get some feedback from the community whether we > > are heading in the correct direction and what else should be addressed. > > There are a few things that it would be nice to include in such a > library, if you're going to develop one: > > - the ability to create abstract groups of processes, and resource > groups, and have the ability to tie these together arbitrarily. E.g > you might create abstract groups A, B and C, and be able to say that A > and B share memory with each other but not with C, and all three > groups are isolated from each other for CPU. Then libcg would mount > different resource types in different cgroup hierarchies (you would > probably tell it ahead of time which combinations of sharing you would > want, in order that it could minimize the number of mounted > hierarchies). When you tell libcg to move a process into abstract > group A, it would move it into the appropriate resource group in each > hierarchy. There is one more important thing. In addition to the processes you must unite or provide a way to unite other objects like sockets. This is needed to create a group-based socket buffer management. The mapping between socket and a process does not exists right now and, we can have (virtually), sockets from from different namespaces in one process. Regards, Den -- 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