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:	Tue, 4 Oct 2011 15:01:11 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm00@...il.com>
To:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Paul Menage <paul@...lmenage.org>,
	Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Aditya Kali <adityakali@...gle.com>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>,
	Tim Hockin <thockin@...kin.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
	Containers <containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] cgroups: Task counter subsystem v6

On Mon,  3 Oct 2011 21:07:02 +0200
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com> wrote:

> Hi Andrew,
> 
> This contains minor changes, mostly documentation and changelog
> updates, off-case build fix, and a code optimization in
> res_counter_common_ancestor().

I'd normally duck a patch series like this when we're at -rc8 and ask
for it to be resent late in -rc1.  But I was feeling frisky so I
grabbed this lot for a bit of testing and will sit on it until -rc1.

I'm still not convinced that the kernel has a burning need for a "task
counter subsystem".  Someone convince me that we should merge this!

> It's hard to put some statistic numbers while testing this feature
> given that the result is rather binary: we launch a forkbomb and
> either we stop and kill it or the system become unresponsive.
>     
> Meanwhile, one can find a testsuite at this address:
> https://tglx.de/~fweisbec/task_counter_test.tar.gz

I do think that we should merge tests like this into the main tree.  So
I can do "cd tests ; make ; ./run-tests".  The first step is for some hero
to propose the (simple!) framework and to drop a first test in there.

> It performs several checks to ensure the interface and the behaviour
> are reliable after common events like moving tasks around over cgroups
> in a hierarchy, forking inside, etc.. It also launches a forkbomb,
> tries to stop and kill it. So beware, don't run it on a system that
> is doing serious things.

Good stuff, that.  Then, when people propose additions or fix bugs, I can
whine at them for not updating the test suite.

> Ensure you have CGROUP_TASK_COUNTER set
> before, or it may compress the Ten Plagues in your MBR and
> inflate the whole after your next reboot.

That problem would need to be fixed.  Either probe for the feature
up-front, or don't build the test at all if CONFIG_CGROUP_TASK_COUNTER=n.

--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ