linux-kernel - Re: Sending some form of notifaction when sched

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]

Date:	Sun, 26 Dec 2010 00:35:04 +0530
From:	Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Dario Faggioli <raistlin@...ux.it>
Cc:	Dhaval Giani <dhaval.giani@...il.com>, torbenh <torbenh@....de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>,
	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>, vatsa@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: Sending some form of notifaction when sched_fifo throttling
 kicks in...

* Dario Faggioli <raistlin@...ux.it> [2010-12-23 15:44:56]:

> On Thu, 2010-12-23 at 15:04 +0100, Dhaval Giani wrote: 
> > > ... If you think you're fine with some /proc (and perhaps cpuacct, if
> > > cgroups are being used) readable, I can try to come up with something.
> > >
> > 
> > There is no point in putting it in cpuacct since cpuacct can be used
> > separately from cpu.
> > 
> Which would mean that you'd need both for having such stat. Anyway, I'm
> fine with putting this in 'cpu' as well, just trying to find a consensus
> on what the right place is.
> 
> > > Do others have some idea and/or comments about that? This is
> > > ABI/interface, and that really scares me! :-P
> > 
> > IIRC, your patchset had something like this for getting the
> > statistics? Starting fromt hre, would schedstats be the right place?
> > 
> SCHED_DEADLINE patchset has both signaling capabilities and some
> statistic reporting, bat it's a different thing.
> 
> I think schedstat could be the right place for _this_ thing here, but
> since each cgroup could be throttled, we also need something which is
> per-cgroup... Don't you agree?
>

You definitely need something per cgroup, have you looked at the
events framework in cgroups and its implementation in memcgroup?



-- 
	Three Cheers,
	Balbir
--
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/