linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] [PATCH -mm 0/2] memcg: per cgroup dirty

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, 24 Sep 2008 02:48:29 +0900 (JST)
From:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To:	"Michael Rubin" <mrubin@...gle.com>
Cc:	kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com,
	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, dradford@...ehost.com,
	m.innocenti@...eca.it, fernando@....ntt.co.jp,
	containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, chlunde@...g.uio.no,
	dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, dpshah@...gle.com, agk@...rceware.org,
	matt@...ehost.com, menage@...gle.com,
	Andrea Righi <righi.andrea@...il.com>, eric.rannaud@...il.com,
	balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH -mm 0/2] memcg: per cgroup dirty_ratio

> Currently the problem we are hitting is that we cannot specify pdflush
> to have background limits less than 1% of memory. I am currently
> finishing up a patch right now that adds a dirty_ratio_millis
> interface.  I hope to submit the patch to LKML by the end of the week.
> 
> The idea is that we don't want to break backwards compatibility and we
> also don't want to have two conflicting knobs in the sysctl or
> /proc/sys/vm/ space. I thought adding a new knob for those who want to
> specify finer grained functionality was a compromise. So the patch has
> a vm_dirty_ratio and a vm_dirty_ratio_millis interface. The first to
> specify 0-100% and the second to specify .0 to .999%.
> 
> So to represent 0.125% of RAM we set
> vm_dirty_ratio = 0
> vm_dirty_ratio_millis = 125
> 
> The same for the background_ratio.

Why vm_dirty_ratio = 0.125 is wrong?
it is hardly for parser maker, but it have nicer user experience.

> 
> I would also prefer using a bytes interface but I am not sure how to
> offer that without  either removing the legacy interface of the ratios
> or by offering a concurrent interface that might be confusing such as
> when users are looking at the old one and not aware of a new one.
> 
> Any feedback?

Sure.
We don't have any motivation of its interface change.



--
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/