linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] CPU hard limits

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: <6599ad830906050303r404c325anc60ded4f45a50b95@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 5 Jun 2009 03:03:18 -0700
From:	Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>
To:	Dhaval Giani <dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	bharata@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>,
	Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ibm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>,
	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux Containers <containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	Herbert Poetzl <herbert@...hfloor.at>
Subject: Re: [RFC] CPU hard limits

On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 2:59 AM, Dhaval Giani<dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> I think we are focusing on the wrong use case here. Guarantees is just a
> useful side-effect we get by using hard limits. I think the more
> important use case is where the provider wants to limit the amount of
> time a user gets (such as in a cloud).
>
> Maybe we should direct our attention in solving that problem? :)
>

Yes, that case and the "predictable load test behaviour" case are both
good reasons for hard limits.

Paul
--
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/