linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/2] memcg: hierarchy support (v3)

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: <20080604181528.f4c94743.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date:	Wed, 4 Jun 2008 18:15:28 +0900
From:	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To:	"Paul Menage" <menage@...gle.com>
Cc:	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"xemul@...nvz.org" <xemul@...nvz.org>,
	"yamamoto@...inux.co.jp" <yamamoto@...inux.co.jp>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/2] memcg: hierarchy support (v3)

On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 01:59:32 -0700
"Paul Menage" <menage@...gle.com> wrote:

> Hi Kame,
> 
> I like the idea of keeping the kernel simple, and moving more of the
> intelligence to userspace.
> 
thanks.

> It may need the kernel to expose a bit more in the way of VM details,
> such as memory pressure, OOM notifications, etc, but as long as
> userspace can respond quickly to memory imbalance, it should work
> fine. We're doing something a bit similar using cpusets and fake NUMA
> at Google - the principle of juggling memory between cpusets is the
> same, but the granularity is much worse :-)
> 
yes, next problem is adding interfaces. but we have to investigate
what is principal.


> On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 9:58 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
> <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> >  - supported hierarchy_model parameter.
> >   Now, no_hierarchy and hardwall_hierarchy is implemented.
> 
> Should we try to support hierarchy and non-hierarchy cgroups in the
> same tree? Maybe we should just enforce the restrictions that:
> 
> - the hierarchy mode can't be changed on a cgroup if you have children
> or any non-zero usage/limit
> - a cgroup inherits its parent's hierarchy mode.
> 
Ah, my patch does it (I think).  explanation is bad.

- mem cgroup's mode can be changed against ROOT node which has no children.
- a child inherits parent's mode.

Thanks,
-Kame


--
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/