linux-kernel - Re: [Question] power management related with cgroup based resource management

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <28c262360810261934g12aa6f15mbd133d39eb57b683@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 27 Oct 2008 11:34:34 +0900
From:	"MinChan Kim" <minchan.kim@...il.com>
To:	"Dong-Jae Kang" <baramsori72@...il.com>
Cc:	"Paul Menage" <menage@...gle.com>,
	"Matthew Garrett" <mjg@...hat.com>, balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com,
	containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, dm-devel@...hat.com,
	corsetproject@...glegroups.com,
	"Vaidyanathan Srinivasan" <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [Question] power management related with cgroup based resource management

Hi, Dong-Jae.


> In some aspect, your opinion is right.
> Existing controller(ex. disk IO controllers) can be run on new HW
> devices(ex. SSD), existing block layer and so on.
>
> but, what I mean is that such controllers can support more performance
> if the controllers are rewrited with reconsideration of the features
> of new HW devices. in other words, what I mean can be optimization of
> controllers for new devices
> For example,
> In case of SSD, current IO scheduler layer is needed ? although i can
> not sure about it ^^
> or process sleep is needed after throwing the IO requests to storage ?
> the role of page cache in SSD or NVRAM is less important than in
> normal HDD and ....

What you mention is already included in 2.6.28 merge window.
I think we can use this feature on NVRAM, too.

http://lwn.net/Articles/303270/


> I heard that many research centers in comanies and universities have
> studied about smiliar research
> of course, it can be OS itself, device drivers, block layer, file
> systems and memory management
>
> Under this trend,
> I just wonder whether the trend can be reflected to cgroup  based
> controllers or not.
> and whether it is meaningful or not?
> How do you think about this?
> My opinion may be some humble ^^

I think it's not cgroup controller's role but each subsystem's one.
As you can see above article, Many mainline guys try to improve
performance in each subsystems.

Do you have a scenario or idea how to use cgroup frame work to manage
devices like NVRAM, SSD ??

> Thank you
> --
> Best Regards,
> Dong-Jae Kang
> --
> 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/
>



-- 
Kinds regards,
MinChan Kim
--
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/