linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 09/11] memcg: add cgroupfs interface to memcg dirty 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: <20101020123110.fd269ab4.nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp>
Date:	Wed, 20 Oct 2010 12:31:10 +0900
From:	Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>
To:	Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	containers@...ts.osdl.org, Andrea Righi <arighi@...eler.com>,
	Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>,
	Ciju Rajan K <ciju@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 09/11] memcg: add cgroupfs interface to memcg dirty
 limits

On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 17:39:42 -0700
Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com> wrote:

> Add cgroupfs interface to memcg dirty page limits:
>   Direct write-out is controlled with:
>   - memory.dirty_ratio
>   - memory.dirty_limit_in_bytes
> 
>   Background write-out is controlled with:
>   - memory.dirty_background_ratio
>   - memory.dirty_background_limit_bytes
> 
> Other memcg cgroupfs files support 'M', 'm', 'k', 'K', 'g'
> and 'G' suffixes for byte counts.  This patch provides the
> same functionality for memory.dirty_limit_in_bytes and
> memory.dirty_background_limit_bytes.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andrea Righi <arighi@...eler.com>
> Signed-off-by: Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>

Acked-by: Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>

One question: shouldn't we return -EINVAL when writing to dirty(_background)_limit_bytes
a bigger value than that of global one(if any) ? Or do you intentionally
set the input value without comparing it with the global value ?
But, hmm..., IMHO we should check it in __mem_cgroup_dirty_param() or something
not to allow dirty pages more than global limit.


Thanks,
Daisuke Nishimura.
--
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/