linux-kernel - Implementation of dm-ioband as a dm-driver (Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH 1/2] dm-ioband: I/O bandwidth controller v1.10.0: Source code and patch)

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: <20090129.124133.179945157.ryov@valinux.co.jp>
Date:	Thu, 29 Jan 2009 12:41:33 +0900 (JST)
From:	Ryo Tsuruta <ryov@...inux.co.jp>
To:	vgoyal@...hat.com
Cc:	dm-devel@...hat.com, agk@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, nauman@...gle.com,
	dpshah@...gle.com, lizf@...fujitsu.com, mikew@...gle.com,
	fchecconi@...il.com, paolo.valente@...more.it,
	jens.axboe@...cle.com, fernando@...ellilink.co.jp,
	s-uchida@...jp.nec.com, taka@...inux.co.jp,
	guijianfeng@...fujitsu.com, arozansk@...hat.com, jmoyer@...hat.com,
	riel@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, menage@...gle.com,
	balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	chrisw@...hat.com
Subject: Implementation of dm-ioband as a dm-driver (Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH
 1/2] dm-ioband: I/O bandwidth controller v1.10.0: Source code and patch)

Hi Vivek,

This mail is about implement IO controller as a dm-driver.

> In this case first you are forcing some functionalilty to go in a kernel
> module and then coming up with tools for configuration. I never understood
> that why don't you let the controller be inside the kernel, let it
> directly interact with cgroup subsystem and work instead of first taking
> the functionality out of kernel in a module and then justifying the case
> that now we need new ways of configuring that module because cgroup
> infrastructure is not sufficient.  

It is possible the algorithm of dm-ioband can be directly implemented
in the kernel. I've been investigating how to do it.

> > > - Need of a dm device for every device we want to control
> > > 
> > > 	- This requirement looks odd. It forces everybody to use dm-tools
> > > 	  and if there are lots of disks in the system, configuation is
> > > 	  pain.
> > 
> > I don't think it's so pain. I think you are already using LVM devices on
> > your boxes. Setting up dm-ioband is the same as that for LVM. And some
> > scripts or something similar will help you set up them.
> 
> Not everybody uses LVM. Balbir had asked once, if there are thousands of 
> disks in the system, does that mean I need to create this dm-ioband device
> for all the disks?

I think it could be easily done by a small script of several lines.

Thanks,
Ryo Tsuruta
--
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/