linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 00/30] Kernel NET policy

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:	Mon, 18 Jul 2016 08:45:12 -0700
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
Cc:	kan.liang@...el.com, davem@...emloft.net,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com,
	mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, kuznet@....inr.ac.ru,
	jmorris@...ei.org, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, kaber@...sh.net,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, keescook@...omium.org,
	viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, gorcunov@...nvz.org,
	john.stultz@...aro.org, aduyck@...antis.com, ben@...adent.org.uk,
	decot@...glers.com, jesse.brandeburg@...el.com, andi@...stfloor.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/30] Kernel NET policy

> It seems strange to me to add such policies to the kernel.
> Addmittingly, documentation of some settings is non-existent and one needs
> various different tools to set this (sysctl, procfs, sysfs, ethtool, etc).

The problem is that different applications need different policies.

The only entity which can efficiently negotiate between different
applications' conflicting requests is the kernel. And that is pretty 
much the basic job description of a kernel: multiplex hardware
efficiently between different users.

So yes the user space tuning approach works for simple cases
("only run workloads that require the same tuning"), but is ultimately not
very interesting nor scalable.

-Andi