Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2010 19:50:23 GMT From: Edward Tomasz Napierala <trasz@FreeBSD.org> To: Perforce Change Reviews <perforce@freebsd.org> Subject: PERFORCE change 186633 for review Message-ID: <201012041950.oB4JoNsd053310@skunkworks.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
http://p4web.freebsd.org/@@186633?ac=10 Change 186633 by trasz@trasz_victim on 2010/12/04 19:49:49 Update TODO. Affected files ... .. //depot/projects/soc2009/trasz_limits/TODO#32 edit Differences ... ==== //depot/projects/soc2009/trasz_limits/TODO#32 (text+ko) ==== @@ -25,9 +25,15 @@ Milestone 3: - - inheritance: different resources need to sum things up differently - - per-jail containers - - per-jail resource limits + - Consider replacing proc pointer with thread pointer in rusage_add(9) et al. + In most cases caller uses 'td->td_proc' anyway, and passing thread would + allow the HRL code to send a signal to the offending thread instead of the + offending process. + + - Do we need separate container hierarchy, or should we just drop it and use + ucred? + + - Remove CONTAINERS #ifdefs. Issues: @@ -73,8 +79,8 @@ 2. Replace single container_lock with individual per-container mutexes. - RUSAGE_NOFILE accounts for size of file descriptor table, rather than the number - of file descriptors. This shouldn't be a problem, but might be worth remembering - about. + of file descriptors. This shouldn't be a problem, but might be worth keeping + in mind. - We should have a limit for the number of files that were mmapped and then closed, and remain mapped in memory. @@ -88,7 +94,7 @@ - Bring back per-group limits. - - Some things need to be accounted for per-euid, and some per-egid. Geez. + - Some things need to be accounted for per-euid, and some per-ruid. Geez. - In maxproc limit, make sure the 'p' argument is a child process. Otherwise, if one adds rule with 'sig*' action, the signal will be sent to the parent
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201012041950.oB4JoNsd053310>