Home » Mailing lists » Devel » [RFC][PATCH 0/7] Resource controllers based on process containers
Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/7] Resource counters [message #10908 is a reply to message #10889] |
Wed, 07 March 2007 04:03 |
Balbir Singh
Messages: 491 Registered: August 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Pavel Emelianov wrote:
> Introduce generic structures and routines for
> resource accounting.
>
> Each resource accounting container is supposed to
> aggregate it, container_subsystem_state and its
> resource-specific members within.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------ ------------
>
> diff -upr linux-2.6.20.orig/include/linux/res_counter.h linux-2.6.20-0/include/linux/res_counter.h
> --- linux-2.6.20.orig/include/linux/res_counter.h 2007-03-06 13:39:17.000000000 +0300
> +++ linux-2.6.20-0/include/linux/res_counter.h 2007-03-06 13:33:28.000000000 +0300
> @@ -0,0 +1,83 @@
> +#ifndef __RES_COUNTER_H__
> +#define __RES_COUNTER_H__
> +/*
> + * resource counters
> + *
> + * Copyright 2007 OpenVZ SWsoft Inc
> + *
> + * Author: Pavel Emelianov <xemul@openvz.org>
> + *
> + */
> +
> +#include <linux/container.h>
> +
> +struct res_counter {
> + unsigned long usage;
> + unsigned long limit;
> + unsigned long failcnt;
> + spinlock_t lock;
> +};
> +
> +enum {
> + RES_USAGE,
> + RES_LIMIT,
> + RES_FAILCNT,
> +};
> +
> +ssize_t res_counter_read(struct res_counter *cnt, int member,
> + const char __user *buf, size_t nbytes, loff_t *pos);
> +ssize_t res_counter_write(struct res_counter *cnt, int member,
> + const char __user *buf, size_t nbytes, loff_t *pos);
> +
> +static inline void res_counter_init(struct res_counter *cnt)
> +{
> + spin_lock_init(&cnt->lock);
> + cnt->limit = (unsigned long)LONG_MAX;
> +}
> +
Is there any way to indicate that there are no limits on this container.
LONG_MAX is quite huge, but still when the administrator wants to
configure a container to *un-limited usage*, it becomes hard for
the administrator.
> +static inline int res_counter_charge_locked(struct res_counter *cnt,
> + unsigned long val)
> +{
> + if (cnt->usage <= cnt->limit - val) {
> + cnt->usage += val;
> + return 0;
> + }
> +
> + cnt->failcnt++;
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +}
> +
> +static inline int res_counter_charge(struct res_counter *cnt,
> + unsigned long val)
> +{
> + int ret;
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&cnt->lock, flags);
> + ret = res_counter_charge_locked(cnt, val);
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cnt->lock, flags);
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
Will atomic counters help here.
> +static inline void res_counter_uncharge_locked(struct res_counter *cnt,
> + unsigned long val)
> +{
> + if (unlikely(cnt->usage < val)) {
> + WARN_ON(1);
> + val = cnt->usage;
> + }
> +
> + cnt->usage -= val;
> +}
> +
> +static inline void res_counter_uncharge(struct res_counter *cnt,
> + unsigned long val)
> +{
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&cnt->lock, flags);
> + res_counter_uncharge_locked(cnt, val);
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cnt->lock, flags);
> +}
> +
> +#endif
> diff -upr linux-2.6.20.orig/init/Kconfig linux-2.6.20-0/init/Kconfig
> --- linux-2.6.20.orig/init/Kconfig 2007-03-06 13:33:28.000000000 +0300
> +++ linux-2.6.20-0/init/Kconfig 2007-03-06 13:33:28.000000000 +0300
> @@ -265,6 +265,10 @@ config CPUSETS
>
> Say N if unsure.
>
> +config RESOURCE_COUNTERS
> + bool
> + select CONTAINERS
> +
> config SYSFS_DEPRECATED
> bool "Create deprecated sysfs files"
> default y
> diff -upr linux-2.6.20.orig/kernel/Makefile linux-2.6.20-0/kernel/Makefile
> --- linux-2.6.20.orig/kernel/Makefile 2007-03-06 13:33:28.000000000 +0300
> +++ linux-2.6.20-0/kernel/Makefile 2007-03-06 13:33:28.000000000 +0300
> @@ -51,6 +51,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_RELAY) += relay.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_UTS_NS) += utsname.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_TASK_DELAY_ACCT) += delayacct.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_TASKSTATS) += taskstats.o tsacct.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_RESOURCE_COUNTERS) += res_counter.o
>
> ifneq ($(CONFIG_SCHED_NO_NO_OMIT_FRAME_POINTER),y)
> # According to Alan Modra <alan@linuxcare.com.au>, the -fno-omit-frame-pointer is
> diff -upr linux-2.6.20.orig/kernel/res_counter.c linux-2.6.20-0/kernel/res_counter.c
> --- linux-2.6.20.orig/kernel/res_counter.c 2007-03-06 13:39:17.000000000 +0300
> +++ linux-2.6.20-0/kernel/res_counter.c 2007-03-06 13:33:28.000000000 +0300
> @@ -0,0 +1,72 @@
> +/*
> + * resource containers
> + *
> + * Copyright 2007 OpenVZ SWsoft Inc
> + *
> + * Author: Pavel Emelianov <xemul@openvz.org>
> + *
> + */
> +
> +#include <linux/parser.h>
> +#include <linux/fs.h>
> +#include <linux/res_counter.h>
> +#include <asm/uaccess.h>
> +
> +static inline unsigned long *res_counter_member(struct res_counter *cnt, int member)
> +{
> + switch (member) {
> + case RES_USAGE:
> + return &cnt->usage;
> + case RES_LIMIT:
> + return &cnt->limit;
> + case RES_FAILCNT:
> + return &cnt->failcnt;
> + };
> +
> + BUG();
> + return NULL;
> +}
> +
> +ssize_t res_counter_read(struct res_counter *cnt, int member,
> + const char __user *userbuf, size_t nbytes, loff_t *pos)
> +{
> + unsigned long *val;
> + char buf[64], *s;
> +
> + s = buf;
> + val = res_counter_member(cnt, member);
> + s += sprintf(s, "%lu\n", *val);
> + return simple_read_from_buffer((void __user *)userbuf, nbytes,
> + pos, buf, s - buf);
> +}
> +
> +ssize_t res_counter_write(struct res_counter *cnt, int member,
> + const char __user *userbuf, size_t nbytes, loff_t *pos)
> +{
> + int ret;
> + char *buf, *end;
> + unsigned long tmp, *val;
> +
> + buf = kmalloc(nbytes + 1, GFP_KERNEL);
> + ret = -ENOMEM;
> + if (buf == NULL)
> + goto out;
> +
> + buf[nbytes] = 0;
> + ret = -EFAULT;
> + if (copy_from_user(buf, userbuf, nbytes))
> + goto out_free;
> +
> + ret = -EINVAL;
> + tmp = simple_strtoul(buf, &end, 10);
> + if (*end != '\0')
> + goto out_free;
> +
> + val = res_counter_member(cnt, member);
> + *val = tmp;
> + ret = nbytes;
> +out_free:
> + kfree(buf);
> +out:
> + return ret;
> +}
>
These bits look a little out of sync, with no users for these routines in
this patch. Won't you get a compiler warning, compiling this bit alone?
--
Warm Regards,
Balbir Singh
Linux Technology Center
IBM, ISTL
|
|
|
|
|
[RFC][PATCH 0/7] Resource controllers based on process containers
By: xemul on Tue, 06 March 2007 14:42
|
|
|
[RFC][PATCH 1/7] Resource counters
By: xemul on Tue, 06 March 2007 14:47
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/7] Resource counters
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/7] Resource counters
By: xemul on Wed, 07 March 2007 07:17
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/7] Resource counters
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/7] Resource counters
By: xemul on Sun, 11 March 2007 09:01
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/7] Resource counters
By: ebiederm on Sun, 11 March 2007 19:00
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/7] Resource counters
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/7] Resource counters
By: ebiederm on Tue, 13 March 2007 09:09
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/7] Resource counters
By: xemul on Tue, 13 March 2007 09:27
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/7] Resource counters
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/7] Resource counters
By: xemul on Tue, 13 March 2007 15:41
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/7] Resource counters
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/7] Resource counters
By: xemul on Wed, 14 March 2007 07:12
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/7] Resource counters
By: ebiederm on Thu, 15 March 2007 16:51
|
|
|
Re: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/7] Resource counters
By: dev on Tue, 13 March 2007 09:36
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/7] Resource counters
|
|
|
[RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
By: xemul on Tue, 06 March 2007 14:53
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
By: dev on Sun, 11 March 2007 12:13
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
By: ebiederm on Sun, 11 March 2007 19:34
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
By: xemul on Mon, 12 March 2007 09:02
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
By: xemul on Tue, 13 March 2007 07:17
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
By: xemul on Tue, 13 March 2007 15:32
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
By: dev on Tue, 13 March 2007 15:10
|
|
|
Re: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
|
|
|
Re: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
By: ebiederm on Tue, 13 March 2007 09:26
|
|
|
Re: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
By: dev on Tue, 13 March 2007 15:30
|
|
|
Re: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
By: dev on Tue, 13 March 2007 10:06
|
|
|
Re: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
|
|
|
Re: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
By: mel on Wed, 14 March 2007 15:38
|
|
|
Re: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
|
|
|
Re: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
By: ebiederm on Mon, 19 March 2007 17:41
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
By: xemul on Sun, 11 March 2007 09:08
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
By: xemul on Sun, 11 March 2007 15:04
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
By: xemul on Mon, 12 March 2007 08:31
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
By: xemul on Wed, 07 March 2007 07:25
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
By: ebiederm on Sun, 18 March 2007 16:58
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
By: akpm on Tue, 13 March 2007 06:04
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
By: Alan Cox on Tue, 13 March 2007 19:09
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
By: ebiederm on Fri, 16 March 2007 00:55
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
By: ebiederm on Fri, 16 March 2007 18:54
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
By: mel on Wed, 14 March 2007 16:47
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
By: dev on Tue, 13 March 2007 15:54
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
By: mel on Tue, 20 March 2007 18:57
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
By: ebiederm on Sun, 18 March 2007 17:42
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core
|
|
|
controlling mmap()'d vs read/write() pages
|
|
|
Re: controlling mmap()'d vs read/write() pages
By: ebiederm on Tue, 20 March 2007 21:19
|
|
|
Re: controlling mmap()'d vs read/write() pages
|
|
|
Re: controlling mmap()'d vs read/write() pages
|
|
|
Re: controlling mmap()'d vs read/write() pages
By: ebiederm on Fri, 23 March 2007 10:12
|
|
|
Re: controlling mmap()'d vs read/write() pages
|
|
|
Re: controlling mmap()'d vs read/write() pages
|
|
|
Re: controlling mmap()'d vs read/write() pages
|
|
|
Re: controlling mmap()'d vs read/write() pages
|
|
|
Re: controlling mmap()'d vs read/write() pages
By: ebiederm on Fri, 23 March 2007 12:21
|
|
|
Re: controlling mmap()'d vs read/write() pages
|
|
|
[RFC][PATCH 3/7] Data structures changes for RSS accounting
By: xemul on Tue, 06 March 2007 14:55
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/7] Data structures changes for RSS accounting
By: ebiederm on Sun, 11 March 2007 19:13
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/7] Data structures changes for RSS accounting
By: dev on Mon, 12 March 2007 16:16
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/7] Data structures changes for RSS accounting
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/7] Data structures changes for RSS accounting
By: xemul on Mon, 12 March 2007 17:19
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/7] Data structures changes for RSS accounting
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/7] Data structures changes for RSS accounting
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/7] Data structures changes for RSS accounting
By: xemul on Tue, 13 March 2007 07:10
|
|
|
[RFC][PATCH 4/7] RSS accounting hooks over the code
By: xemul on Tue, 06 March 2007 14:57
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/7] RSS accounting hooks over the code
By: xemul on Wed, 14 March 2007 15:43
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/7] RSS accounting hooks over the code
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/7] RSS accounting hooks over the code
By: ebiederm on Sun, 11 March 2007 19:14
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/7] RSS accounting hooks over the code
By: dev on Mon, 12 March 2007 16:23
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/7] RSS accounting hooks over the code
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/7] RSS accounting hooks over the code
By: dev on Mon, 12 March 2007 17:07
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/7] RSS accounting hooks over the code
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/7] RSS accounting hooks over the code
By: ebiederm on Tue, 13 March 2007 09:58
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/7] RSS accounting hooks over the code
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/7] RSS accounting hooks over the code
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/7] RSS accounting hooks over the code
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/7] RSS accounting hooks over the code
By: ebiederm on Tue, 13 March 2007 09:43
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/7] RSS accounting hooks over the code
By: ebiederm on Tue, 13 March 2007 16:01
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/7] RSS accounting hooks over the code
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/7] RSS accounting hooks over the code
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/7] RSS accounting hooks over the code
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/7] RSS accounting hooks over the code
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/7] RSS accounting hooks over the code
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/7] RSS accounting hooks over the code
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/7] RSS accounting hooks over the code
By: dev on Wed, 14 March 2007 16:16
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/7] RSS accounting hooks over the code
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/7] RSS accounting hooks over the code
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/7] RSS accounting hooks over the code
|
|
|
[RFC][PATCH 5/7] Per-container OOM killer and page reclamation
By: xemul on Tue, 06 March 2007 15:01
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 5/7] Per-container OOM killer and page reclamation
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 5/7] Per-container OOM killer and page reclamation
By: xemul on Sun, 11 March 2007 08:39
|
|
|
[RFC][PATCH 6/7] Account for the number of tasks within container
By: xemul on Tue, 06 March 2007 15:02
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 6/7] Account for the number of tasks within container
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 6/7] Account for the number of tasks within container
By: xemul on Wed, 07 March 2007 07:10
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 6/7] Account for the number of tasks within container
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 6/7] Account for the number of tasks within container
By: xemul on Sun, 11 March 2007 08:34
|
|
|
[RFC][PATCH 7/7] Account for the number of files opened within container
By: xemul on Tue, 06 March 2007 15:05
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/7] Resource controllers based on process containers
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/7] Resource controllers based on process containers
By: xemul on Wed, 07 March 2007 07:27
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/7] Resource controllers based on process containers
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/7] Resource controllers based on process containers
By: xemul on Wed, 07 March 2007 07:30
|
|
|
Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/7] Resource controllers based on process containers
By: dev on Wed, 07 March 2007 09:30
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sun Dec 08 09:12:39 GMT 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02727 seconds
|