linux-kernel - Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH v3] sched: automated per tty task groups

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: <1289933965.2109.652.camel@laptop>
Date:	Tue, 16 Nov 2010 19:59:25 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To:	david@...g.hm
Cc:	Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>,
	Lennart Poettering <mzxreary@...inter.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Dhaval Giani <dhaval.giani@...il.com>,
	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@...ppelsdorf.de>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH v3] sched: automated per tty task groups

On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 10:55 -0800, david@...g.hm wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Nov 2010, Paul Menage wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> wrote:
> >>
> >> Not quite the same, you're nesting one level deeper. But the reality is,
> >> not a lot of people will change their userspace.
> >
> > That's a weak argument - not a lot of people will (explicitly) change
> > their kernel either - they'll get a fresh kernel via their distro
> > updates, as they would get userspace updates. So it's only a few
> > people (distros) that actually need to make such a change.
> 
> what is the downside of this patch going to be?
> 
> people who currently expect all the processes to compete equally will now 
> find that they no longer do so. If I am understanding this correctly, this 
> could mean that a box that was dedicated to running one application will 
> now have that application no longer dominate the system, instead it will 
> 'share equally' with the housekeeping apps on the system.
> 
> what would need to be done to revert to the prior situation?

build with: CONFIG_SCHED_AUTOGROUP=n, 
boot with: noautogroup or 
runtime: echo 0 > /proc/sysctl/kernel/sched_autogroup_enabled

(although the latter is a lazy one, it won't force existing tasks back
to the root group)
--
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/