Messages in this thread | | | From | Cong Wang <> | Date | Mon, 18 Jul 2016 10:52:17 -0700 | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 00/30] Kernel NET policy |
| |
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 8:45 AM, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> wrote: >> It seems strange to me to add such policies to the kernel. >> Addmittingly, documentation of some settings is non-existent and one needs >> various different tools to set this (sysctl, procfs, sysfs, ethtool, etc). > > The problem is that different applications need different policies. > > The only entity which can efficiently negotiate between different > applications' conflicting requests is the kernel. And that is pretty > much the basic job description of a kernel: multiplex hardware > efficiently between different users. > > So yes the user space tuning approach works for simple cases > ("only run workloads that require the same tuning"), but is ultimately not > very interesting nor scalable.
I don't read the code yet, just the cover letter.
We have global tunings, per-network-namespace tunings, per-socket tunings. It is still unclear why you can't just put different applications into different namespaces/containers to get different policies.
| |