linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] cgroup: define controller file conventions

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: <20150804084257.GJ25159@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:	Tue, 4 Aug 2015 10:42:57 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	mingo@...hat.com, hannes@...xchg.org, lizefan@...wei.com,
	cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	kernel-team@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] cgroup: define controller file conventions

On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 06:41:27PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> +- If a controller implements an absolute resource limit, the control
> +  knob should be named "max".  The special token "max" should be used
> +  to represent no limit for both reading and writing.

So what do you do with minimal resource guarantees? That's still an
absolute resource limit and 'max' is obviously the wrong name.
--
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/