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: <20101116233934.GC1568@thunk.org>
Date:	Tue, 16 Nov 2010 18:39:34 -0500
From:	Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To:	Lennart Poettering <mzxreary@...inter.de>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Dhaval Giani <dhaval.giani@...il.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	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, Nov 16, 2010 at 10:19:09PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> Well, my plan was actually to by default put everything into its own
> group, and then let users opt-out of that for specific processes, if the
> want to.

How many users are likely to do this, though?

I think you really want to make this be something which the
application can specify by default that they should start in their own
cgroup.  One idea might be to it to the applications menu entry:

http://standards.freedesktop.org/desktop-entry-spec/latest/

... so there would be a new key value pair, "start_in_cgroup", that
would allow the user to start an application in their own cgroup.  It
would be up to the desktop launcher to honor that if it was present.

One nice thing about having the desktop launch each application in its
own cgroup is that it becomes easier for an desktop task manager to
have a UI listing that lists things in a format which will be somewhat
easier to understand than process listing.  The cgroup would be a
useful way to organize what is going on for each launched application,
and it would allow people to see how much memory some application like
evolution really requires.  (On the other hand, maybe they would be
happier not knowing.  :-)

						- Ted
--
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/