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: <20101118234339.GA6024@const.famille.thibault.fr>
Date:	Fri, 19 Nov 2010 00:43:39 +0100
From:	Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@...-lyon.org>
To:	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
Cc:	Hans-Peter Jansen <hpj@...la.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Lennart Poettering <mzxreary@...inter.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, david@...g.hm,
	Dhaval Giani <dhaval.giani@...il.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	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>,
	Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH v3] sched: automated per tty task groups

Mike Galbraith, le Thu 18 Nov 2010 16:35:51 -0700, a écrit :
> On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 00:12 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Hans-Peter Jansen, le Thu 18 Nov 2010 23:33:46 +0100, a écrit :
> > > As already mentioned countless times (and some of it was even renamed 
> > > for this very fact): the grouping by tty is just a starter. There are 
> > > plenty of other possibilities to group the scheduling. The hard part is 
> > > to find the right grouping concepts, that are making sense in the 
> > > usability department _and_ are easy enough to be picked up from our 
> > > favorite system and desktop environments. That's where the generic 
> > > cgroup concept seems to be lacking ATM..
> > 
> > Actually, cgroups should probably be completely hierarchical: sessions
> > contain process groups, which contain processes, which contain threads.
> > You could also gather sessions with the same uid.
> 
> Hierarchical is ~tempting, but adds overhead for not much gain.

What overhead? The implementation of cgroups is actually already
hierarchical.

Samuel
--
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/