[lkml]   [2016]   [Oct]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: aio: questions with ioctx_alloc() and large num_possible_cpus()
On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 02:58:12PM -0300, Mauricio Faria de Oliveira wrote:
> Hi Benjamin,
> On 10/05/2016 02:41 PM, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
> >I'd suggest increasing the default limit by changing how it is calculated.
> >The current number came about 13 years ago when machines had orders of
> >magnitude less RAM than they do today.
> Thanks for the suggestion.
> Does the default also have implications other than memory usage?
> For example, concurrency/performance of as much aio contexts running,
> or if userspace could try to exploit some point with a larger number?

Anything's possible when a local user can run code. It's the same problem
as determining how much memory can be mlock()ed, or how much i/o a process
should be allowed to do. Nothing prevents an app from doing a huge amount
of readahed() calls to make the system prefetch gigabytes of data. That
said, local users tend not to DoS themselves.

> Wondering about it because it can be set based on num_possible_cpus(),
> but that might be really large on high-end systems.

Today's high end systems are tomorrow's desktops... It probably makes
sense to implement per-user limits rather than the current global limit,
and maybe even convert them to an rlimit to better fit in with the
available frameworks for managing these things.


> Regards,
> --
> Mauricio Faria de Oliveira
> IBM Linux Technology Center

"Thought is the essence of where you are now."

 \ /
  Last update: 2016-10-05 20:18    [W:0.242 / U:0.808 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site