linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/12] Cqm2: Intel Cache quality monitoring fixes

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: <20170123113009.GW6485@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Mon, 23 Jan 2017 12:30:09 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     David Carrillo-Cisneros <davidcc@...gle.com>,
        Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@...ux.intel.com>,
        Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@...el.com>,
        Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        x86 <x86@...nel.org>, hpa@...or.com,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        "Shankar, Ravi V" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
        "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>, andi.kleen@...el.com,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <h.peter.anvin@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/12] Cqm2: Intel Cache quality monitoring fixes

On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 10:47:44AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> So again: 
> 
>   Can please everyone involved write up their specific requirements
>   for CQM and stop spamming us with half baken design proposals?
> 
>   And I mean abstract requirements and not again something which is
>   referring to existing crap or some desired crap.
> 
> The complete list of requirements has to be agreed on before we talk about
> anything else.

So something along the lines of:

 A) need to create a (named) group of tasks
   1) group composition needs to be dynamic; ie. we can add/remove member
      tasks at any time.
   2) a task can only belong to _one_ group at any one time.
   3) grouping need not be hierarchical?

 B) for each group, we need to set a CAT mask
   1) this CAT mask must be dynamic; ie. we can, during the existence of
      the group, change the mask at any time.

 C) for each group, we need to monitor CQM bits
   1) this monitor need not change


Supporting Use-Cases:

A.1: The Job (or VM) can have a dynamic task set
B.1: Dynamic QoS for each Job (or VM) as demand / load changes



Feel free to expand etc..