linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/9] bio-cgroup controller

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: <20090417175140.9e285acf.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date:	Fri, 17 Apr 2009 17:51:40 +0900
From:	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To:	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	Ryo Tsuruta <ryov@...inux.co.jp>, yoshikawa.takuya@....ntt.co.jp,
	righi.andrea@...il.com, menage@...gle.com,
	balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, guijianfeng@...fujitsu.com,
	agk@...rceware.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, axboe@...nel.dk,
	baramsori72@...il.com, chlunde@...g.uio.no,
	dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, dpshah@...gle.com, eric.rannaud@...il.com,
	fernando@....ntt.co.jp, taka@...inux.co.jp, lizf@...fujitsu.com,
	matt@...ehost.com, dradford@...ehost.com, ngupta@...gle.com,
	randy.dunlap@...cle.com, roberto@...it.it, s-uchida@...jp.nec.com,
	subrata@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] bio-cgroup controller

On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 17:48:54 +0900
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 17:00:16 +0900
> KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 16:22:01 +0900 (JST)
> > Ryo Tsuruta <ryov@...inux.co.jp> wrote:
> > 
> > > In the case where the bio-cgroup data is allocated dynamically,
> > >    - Sometimes quite a large amount of memory get marked dirty.
> > >      In this case it requires more kernel memory than that of the
> > >      current implementation.
> > >    - The operation is expansive due to memory allocations and exclusive
> > >      controls by such as spinlocks.
> > > 
> > > In the case where the bio-cgroup data is allocated by delayed allocation, 
> > >   - It makes the operation complicated and expensive, because
> > >     sometimes a bio has to be created in the context of other
> > >     processes, such as aio and swap-out operation.
> > > 
> > > I'd prefer a simple and lightweight implementation. bio-cgroup only
> > > needs 4bytes unlike memory controller. The reason why bio-cgroup chose
> > > this approach is to minimize the overhead.
> > > 
> > My point is, plz do your best to reduce memory usage here. You increase
> > size of page_cgroup just because you cannot increase size of struct page.
> > It's not be sane reason to increase size of this object.
> > It's a cheat in my point of view.
> > 
> 
> Can't this work sanely ?
> Hmm, endian is obstacle ?
> ==
> 	sturct page_cgroup {
> 		union {
> 			struct {
> 				unsigned long memcg_field:16;
> 				unsigned long blockio_field:16;
> 			} field;
> 			unsigned long flags; /* unsigned long is not 32bits */
> 		} flags;
> 	}
> ==
> 
....sorry plz ignore.
-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/