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: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 17:14:06 -0800 (PST) From: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com> To: Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com> cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] slub: enforce cpuset restrictions for cpu slabs On Tue, 3 Mar 2009, Paul Menage wrote: > > That would help for cpusets that are looking for NUMA optimizations (i.e. > > probably long-lived objects with local affinity) but would not ensure > > memory isolation from tasks in other exclusive cpusets from allocating on > > my slab. > > That would be the sysadmin's choice, if they set these other cpusets > with slab_hardwall=false. > > Presumably in most cases all cpusets would have slab_hardwall set to > the same value. > True, and this would have to be clearly documented in Documentation/cgroups/cpusets.txt. Christoph, would a `slab_hardwall' cpuset setting address your concerns? -- 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