From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
To: Yauheni Kaliuta <yauheni.kaliuta@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, aris@redhat.com, jolsa@redhat.com,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/2] rlimits: report resource limits violations
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 14:20:58 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160907212057.GB70909@ast-mbp.thefacebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1473244055-25240-3-git-send-email-yauheni.kaliuta@redhat.com>
On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 01:27:35PM +0300, Yauheni Kaliuta wrote:
> The patch instrument different places of resource limits checks with
> reporting using the infrastructure from the previous patch.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yauheni Kaliuta <yauheni.kaliuta@redhat.com>
> ---
> arch/ia64/kernel/perfmon.c | 4 +++-
> arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_64_vio.c | 6 ++++--
> arch/powerpc/mm/mmu_context_iommu.c | 6 ++++--
> drivers/android/binder.c | 7 ++++++-
> drivers/infiniband/core/umem.c | 1 +
> drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/user_pages.c | 5 ++++-
> drivers/infiniband/hw/qib/qib_user_pages.c | 1 +
> drivers/infiniband/hw/usnic/usnic_uiom.c | 1 +
> drivers/misc/mic/scif/scif_rma.c | 1 +
> drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_spapr_tce.c | 6 ++++--
> drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c | 4 ++++
> fs/attr.c | 4 +++-
> fs/binfmt_aout.c | 4 +++-
> fs/binfmt_flat.c | 1 +
> fs/coredump.c | 4 +++-
> fs/exec.c | 14 ++++++++++----
> fs/file.c | 26 +++++++++++++++++++++-----
> fs/select.c | 4 +++-
> include/linux/mm.h | 7 ++++++-
> ipc/mqueue.c | 10 ++++++++--
> ipc/shm.c | 1 +
> kernel/bpf/syscall.c | 15 ++++++++++++---
> kernel/events/core.c | 1 +
> kernel/fork.c | 9 ++++++---
> kernel/sched/core.c | 17 +++++++++++++----
> kernel/signal.c | 7 ++++---
> kernel/sys.c | 9 ++++++---
> kernel/time/posix-cpu-timers.c | 8 ++++++++
> mm/mlock.c | 14 +++++++++++++-
> mm/mmap.c | 19 +++++++++++++++----
> mm/mremap.c | 4 +++-
> net/unix/af_unix.c | 9 ++++++---
> 32 files changed, 179 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-)
I'm certainly not excited that we'd need to maintain this
rlimit tracking for foreseeable future.
I can be convinced otherwise, but so far I don't see
strong enough use case that warrants these changes all over.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-07 21:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-19 14:41 [RFC] rlimit exceed notification events Yauheni Kaliuta
2016-08-24 11:24 ` Jiri Olsa
2016-08-25 10:07 ` Yauheni Kaliuta
2016-09-07 10:27 ` [PATCH RFC 0/2] " Yauheni Kaliuta
2016-09-07 10:27 ` [PATCH RFC 1/2] rlimits: add infra to report violations Yauheni Kaliuta
2016-09-07 10:27 ` [PATCH RFC 2/2] rlimits: report resource limits violations Yauheni Kaliuta
2016-09-07 21:20 ` Alexei Starovoitov [this message]
2016-09-08 13:09 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-09-09 9:28 ` [PATCH RFC 0/2] rlimit exceed notification events Christoph Hellwig
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160907212057.GB70909@ast-mbp.thefacebook.com \
--to=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=aris@redhat.com \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=yauheni.kaliuta@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).