linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 02/14] resource limits: aggregate task highwater marks to cgroup level

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20160719181815.GI3078@mtj.duckdns.org>
Date:	Tue, 19 Jul 2016 14:18:15 -0400
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Topi Miettinen <toiwoton@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
	Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com>,
	"open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
	"open list:CONTROL GROUP (CGROUP)" <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/14] resource limits: aggregate task highwater marks to
 cgroup level

Hello, Topi.

On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 04:57:10PM +0000, Topi Miettinen wrote:
> Then there would need to be new limit checks at cgroup level. Would you
> see problems with that approach?

I'm worried that you're rushing this feature without thinking through
it.  You were mixing up completely orthogonal planes of accounting and
control without too much thought and are now suggesting something
which is also strange.  What do you mean by "new limit checks at
cgroup level"?  How would this be different from the resource
accounting and control implemented in the existing controllers?

Please take a step back and think through the overall design before
proposing changes to userland visible interface.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun