| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <50B47E40.5030805@parallels.com> Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 12:48:00 +0400 From: Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com> To: Michael Wolf <mjw@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> CC: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <riel@...hat.com>, <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, <peterz@...radead.org>, <mtosatti@...hat.com>, <mingo@...hat.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Alter steal time reporting in KVM Hi, On 11/27/2012 12:36 AM, Michael Wolf wrote: > In the case of where you have a system that is running in a > capped or overcommitted environment the user may see steal time > being reported in accounting tools such as top or vmstat. This can > cause confusion for the end user. To ease the confusion this patch set > adds the idea of consigned (expected steal) time. The host will separate > the consigned time from the steal time. The consignment limit passed to the > host will be the amount of steal time expected within a fixed period of > time. Any other steal time accruing during that period will show as the > traditional steal time. If you submit this again, please include a version number in your series. It would also be helpful to include a small changelog about what changed between last version and this version, so we could focus on that. As for the rest, I answered your previous two submissions saying I don't agree with the concept. If you hadn't changed anything, resending it won't change my mind. I could of course, be mistaken or misguided. But I had also not seen any wave of support in favor of this previously, so basically I have no new data to make me believe I should see it any differently. Let's try this again: * Rik asked you in your last submission how does ppc handle this. You said, and I quote: "In the case of lpar on POWER systems they simply report steal time and do not alter it in any way. They do however report how much processor is assigned to the partition and that information is in /proc/ppc64/lparcfg." Now, that is a *way* more sensible thing to do. Much more. "Confusing users" is something extremely subjective. This is specially true about concepts that are know for quite some time, like steal time. If you out of a sudden change the meaning of this, it is sure to confuse a lot more users than it would clarify. > > --- > > Michael Wolf (5): > Alter the amount of steal time reported by the guest. > Expand the steal time msr to also contain the consigned time. > Add the code to send the consigned time from the host to the guest > Add a timer to allow the separation of consigned from steal time. > Add an ioctl to communicate the consign limit to the host. > > > arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 11 +++++++ > arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_para.h | 3 +- > arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt.h | 4 +-- > arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt_types.h | 2 + > arch/x86/kernel/kvm.c | 8 ++--- > arch/x86/kernel/paravirt.c | 4 +-- > arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 50 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > fs/proc/stat.c | 9 +++++- > include/linux/kernel_stat.h | 2 + > include/linux/kvm_host.h | 2 + > include/uapi/linux/kvm.h | 2 + > kernel/sched/core.c | 10 ++++++- > kernel/sched/cputime.c | 21 +++++++++++++- > kernel/sched/sched.h | 2 + > virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 7 +++++ > 15 files changed, 120 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) > -- 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