[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <538966B2.9030007@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 31 May 2014 07:20:50 +0200
From: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@...il.com>
To: Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@...com>,
Rafael Aquini <aquini@...hat.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
CC: mtk.manpages@...il.com, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
1vier1@....de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] ipc: Further updates to sysv/mqueue limits
On 05/29/2014 08:46 PM, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> a) If we increase SHMMAX/SHMALL, then it makes sense to
> increase MSGMNI, too.
> And: This allows to remove the automatic scaling (~300 lines)
>
> b) We can also increase SEMMSL, SEMMNI and SEMOPM
>
> c) I think it would make more sense if a namespace starts with the
> limits from it's parent:
> If an admin set the limits, then he probably wants that these limits also
> apply for a new child namespace.
Hi Manfred,
This these patches change the API/ABI, could you CC linux-api [1] for future
iterations.
Cheers,
Michael
[1] https://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/linux-api-ml.html
> All patches are RFC - they compile, but that's it.
>
> TODO:
> - check if the sysv sem limits are sane.
> Especially the SEMOPM - if real users exist that pass > 1k ops, then
> switch from kmalloc to vmalloc.
>
> @the Redhat developers: Do you have any idea where this "often
> recommended" comes from?
> https://access.redhat.com/site/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/5/html/Tuning_and_Optimizing_Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux_for_Oracle_9i_and_10g_Databases/sect-Oracle_9i_and_10g_Tuning_Guide-Setting_Semaphores-The_SEMOPM_Parameter.html
>
> - copy Davidlohrs explanation for the sysv shm limits to sysv msg and
> sysv sem.
>
> - check if we should also increase the limits for posix mqueue
>
> - decide if it would make sense to increase IPCMNI:
>
> Right now, it is 32768. This means that after 65536 pairs of
> semget()/semctl(IPC_RMID), semget() will return the same identifier
> again - and a semop(old_id) won't return -EINVAL, instead it will
> access the "new" array, which is probably now what the caller
> intended to do.
>
> The split is arbitrary - we could also split it 1048576/2048 or any
> other split we want.
>
> - test everything.
>
> --
> Manfred
>
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
--
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