Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/3] TCP/IP Critical socket communication mechanism

[James Courtier-Dutton <James@superbug.co.uk>]

Sridhar Samudrala wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-12-14 at 20:49 +0000, James Courtier-Dutton wrote:
>
> > Jesper Juhl wrote:
> >
> > > On 12/14/05, Sridhar Samudrala <sri@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > These set of patches provide a TCP/IP emergency communication mechanism that
> > > > could be used to guarantee high priority communications over a critical socket
> > > > to succeed even under very low memory conditions that last for a couple of
> > > > minutes. It uses the critical page pool facility provided by Matt's patches
> > > > that he posted recently on lkml.
> > > >       http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/12/14/34/index.html
> > > >
> > > > This mechanism provides a new socket option SO_CRITICAL that can be used to
> > > > mark a socket as critical. A critical connection used for emergency
> > >
> > >
> > > So now everyone writing commercial apps for Linux are going to set
> > > SO_CRITICAL on sockets in their apps so their apps can "survive better
> > > under pressure than the competitors aps" and clueless programmers all
> > > over are going to think "cool, with this I can make my app more
> > > important than everyone elses, I'm going to use this".  When everyone
> > > and his dog starts to set this, what's the point?
> >
> > I don't think the initial patches that Matt did were intended for what 
> > you are describing.
> > When I had the conversation with Matt at KS, the problem we were trying 
> > to solve was "Memory pressure with network attached swap space".
> > I came up with the idea that I think Matt has implemented.
> > Letting the OS choose which are "critical" TCP/IP sessions is fine. But 
> > letting an application choose is a recipe for disaster.
>
>
> We could easily add capable(CAP_NET_ADMIN) check to allow this option to
> be set only by privileged users.
>
> Thanks
> Sridhar

Sridhar,

Have you actually thought about what would happen in a real world senario?
There is no real world requirement for this sort of user land feature.
In memory pressure mode, you don't care about user applications. In 
fact, under memory pressure no user applications are getting scheduled.
All you care about is swapping out memory to achieve a net gain in free 
memory, so that the applications can then run ok again.

James
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/