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: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1011202136310.24071@swampdragon.chaosbits.net>
Date:	Sat, 20 Nov 2010 21:37:08 +0100 (CET)
From:	Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net>
To:	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@...ppelsdorf.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH v3] sched: automated per tty task groups

On Sat, 20 Nov 2010, Mike Galbraith wrote:

> On Sat, 2010-11-20 at 20:33 +0100, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> > On Mon, 15 Nov 2010, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > 
> > > On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 2:41 PM,  <Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > So the set of all tasks that never call proc_set_tty() ends up in the same one
> > > > big default group, correct?
> > > 
> > > Well, yes and no.
> > > 
> > > Yes, that's what the code currently does. But I did ask Mike (and he
> > > delivered) to try to make the code look and work in a way where the
> > > whole "tty thing" is just one of the heuristics.
> > > 
> > > It's not clear exactly what the non-tty heuristics would be, but I do
> > > have a few suggestions:
> > > 
> > >  -  I think it might be a good idea to associate a task group with the
> > > current "cred" of a process, and fall back on it in the absense of a
> > > tty-provided one.
> > > 
> > Or how about (just brainstorming here) a group per 'process group'?
> 
> I switched to per session, which on my system at least looks like more
> than enough granularity.
> 
Sounds sane and it's closer to the original 'per tty' which was so 
successful.

-- 
Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net>            http://www.chaosbits.net/
Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
Plain text mails only, please.

--
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/