| 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, 8 Jun 2010 12:45:26 +0300 From: Eyal Lotem <eyal.lotem@...il.com> To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [RFC] Using "page credits" as a solution for common thrashing scenarios Replying to a very old email :-) On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 12:15 AM, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> wrote: > Eyal Lotem <eyal.lotem@...il.com> writes: > > Replying to an old email. > >> * I think it is wrong for the kernel to evict the 15 pages of the bash, >> xterm, X server's working set, as an example, in order for a >> misbehaving process to have 1000015 instead of 1000000 pages in its >> working set. EVEN if that misbehaving process is accessing its working >> set far more aggressively. > > One problem in practice tends to be that it's hard to realiably detect > that a process is misbehaving. The 1000000 page process might be your > critical database, while the 15 page process is something very > unimportant. Well, this solution doesn't really depend on any detection of "misbehaving", it just goes about a more accurate way of defining page importance. A simple solution to the problem you suggest is assigning far more "credits" to the database than to the 15-page process. Eyal > > -Andi > > -- > ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only. > -- 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