linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 09/10] sched/psi: per-cgroup PSI stats disable/re-enable interface

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: <YvPN07UlaPFAdlet@cmpxchg.org>
Date:   Wed, 10 Aug 2022 11:25:07 -0400
From:   Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
To:     Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@...edance.com>
Cc:     Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, corbet@....net, surenb@...gle.com,
        mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
        dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com,
        cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, songmuchun@...edance.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 09/10] sched/psi: per-cgroup PSI stats
 disable/re-enable interface

On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 09:30:59AM +0800, Chengming Zhou wrote:
> On 2022/8/10 08:39, Chengming Zhou wrote:
> > On 2022/8/10 01:48, Tejun Heo wrote:
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> On Mon, Aug 08, 2022 at 07:03:40PM +0800, Chengming Zhou wrote:
> >>> So this patch introduce a per-cgroup PSI stats disable/re-enable
> >>> interface "cgroup.psi", which is a read-write single value file that
> >>> allowed values are "0" and "1", the defaults is "1" so per-cgroup
> >>> PSI stats is enabled by default.
> >>
> >> Given that the knobs are named {cpu|memory|io}.pressure, I wonder whether
> >> "cgroup.psi" is the best name. Also, it doesn't convey that it's the
> >> enable/disable knob. I think it needs a better name.
> > 
> > Yes, "cgroup.psi" is not good. What abort "pressure.enable" or "cgroup.psi_enable"?
> 
> Doesn't look good either, what do you think of "cgroup.pressure.enable"?

How about just cgroup.pressure? Too ambiguous?

cgroup.pressure.enable sounds good to me too. Or, because it's
default-enabled and that likely won't change, cgroup.pressure.disable.