linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next] blk-throttle: enable io throttle for root in cgroup v2

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, 6 Feb 2023 16:00:05 +0100
From:   Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>
To:     Ofir Gal <ofir.gal@...umez.com>
Cc:     ming.lei@...hat.com, axboe@...nel.dk, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        tj@...nel.org, yi.zhang@...wei.com, yukuai3@...wei.com,
        Ofir Gal <ofir@....software>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] blk-throttle: enable io throttle for root in
 cgroup v2

On Sun, Feb 05, 2023 at 05:55:41PM +0200, Ofir Gal <ofir.gal@...umez.com> wrote:
> I have tried to limit the SSD on Server #1, but it seems that the NVME
> target kworkers are not affected unless I use Yu Kuai's patch.
> 
> Can you elaborate on the issues with this patch or how the scenario
> described above can be done with cgroups v2?

The issue is that if there's a client that doesn't implement
self-throttling you cannot guarantee anything on the server side.
Hence the mechanism must exist on the server side.

The NVME target should charge IO to respective blkcg's (just a generic
advice, I'm not familiar with that interface; see also
kthread_associate_blkcg() use in loop device driver).

HTH,
Michal

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)