Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 00/14] Present useful limits to user (v2) | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Date | Fri, 15 Jul 2016 13:54:44 -0700 |
| |
<lizefan@huawei.com>,Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com>,Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>,"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com>,Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,Konstantin Khlebnikov <koct9i@gmail.com>,Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>,Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@openvz.org>,Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>,Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>,"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,Marcus Gelderie <redmnic@gmail.com>,Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@virtuozzo.com>,Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,! "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,Stas Sergeev <stsp@list.ru>,Amanieu d'Antras <amanieu@gmail.com>,Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,Wang Xiaoqiang <wangxq10@lzu.edu.cn>,Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>,Mateusz Guzik <mguzik@redhat.com>,Alex Thorlton <athorlton@sgi.com>,Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>,John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>,Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,Eric B Munson <emunson@akamai.com>,Alexey Klimov <klimov.linux@gmail.com>,Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j@gmail.com>,Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>,David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,Alexander Kuleshov <kuleshovmail@gmail.com>,"open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,"open list:IA64 (Itanium) PLATFORM" <linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org>,"open list:KERNEL VIRTUAL MACHINE (KVM) FOR POWERPC" <kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org>,"open list:KERNEL VIRTUAL MACHINE (KVM)" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,"open list:LINUX FOR POWERPC! (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,"open list:INFINIBAND SUBSYSTEM" <linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org>,"open list:FILESYSTEMS (VFS and infrastructure)" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,"open list:CONTROL GROUP (CGROUP)" <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>,"open list:BPF (Safe dynamic programs and tools)" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,"open list:MEMORY MANAGEMENT" <linux-mm@kvack.org> Message-ID: <D79806FE-E6B9-481B-8AA2-A1800419D9B5@zytor.com>
On July 15, 2016 6:59:56 AM PDT, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote: >On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 01:52:48PM +0000, Topi Miettinen wrote: >> On 07/15/16 12:43, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 01:35:47PM +0300, Topi Miettinen wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> >> >> There are many basic ways to control processes, including >capabilities, >> >> cgroups and resource limits. However, there are far fewer ways to >find out >> >> useful values for the limits, except blind trial and error. >> >> >> >> This patch series attempts to fix that by giving at least a nice >starting >> >> point from the highwater mark values of the resources in question. >> >> I looked where each limit is checked and added a call to update >the mark >> >> nearby. >> > >> > And how is that useful? Setting things to the high watermark is >> > basically the same as not setting the limit at all. >> >> What else would you use, too small limits? > >That question doesn't make sense. > >What's the point of setting a limit if it ends up being the same as >no-limit (aka unlimited). > >If you cannot explain; and you have not so far; what use these values >are, why would we look at the patches.
One reason is to catch a malfunctioning process rather than dragging the whole system down with it. It could also be useful for development. -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse brevity and formatting.
| |