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

Message-ID: <20230206151031.GB21332@blackbody.suse.cz>
Date:   Mon, 6 Feb 2023 16:10:31 +0100
From:   Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>
To:     "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@...wei.com>
Cc:     Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, axboe@...nel.dk,
        cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, yi.zhang@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] blk-throttle: enable io throttle for root in
 cgroup v2

Hello Kuai.

On Wed, Feb 09, 2022 at 09:22:30AM +0800, "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@...wei.com> wrote:
> Do you agree that the server can't control how many io it can receives
> from one client if we limit from server? I think the difference is that
> limit from client can control it...

(Perhaps it depends on the protocol used for the IO but) eventually
client requests would be noticably lost/dropped and that's how the
server propagates the requested control onto the clients without relying
on the clients throttling themselves.

(Maybe better place to implement this would be a "testing" device mapper
target akin to the 'delay' one.)

Regards,
Michal

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