From owner-p4-projects@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Jan 27 20:04:30 2011
Return-Path: <owner-p4-projects@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: p4-projects@freebsd.org
Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 32767)
	id AB2F41065675; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 20:04:30 +0000 (UTC)
Delivered-To: perforce@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BAEB106566B
	for <perforce@freebsd.org>; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 20:04:30 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from trasz@freebsd.org)
Received: from skunkworks.freebsd.org (skunkworks.freebsd.org
	[IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::2d])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 594008FC14
	for <perforce@freebsd.org>; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 20:04:30 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from skunkworks.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by skunkworks.freebsd.org (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p0RK4UDE078255
	for <perforce@freebsd.org>; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 20:04:30 GMT
	(envelope-from trasz@freebsd.org)
Received: (from perforce@localhost)
	by skunkworks.freebsd.org (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id p0RK4UhG078252
	for perforce@freebsd.org; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 20:04:30 GMT
	(envelope-from trasz@freebsd.org)
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 20:04:30 GMT
Message-Id: <201101272004.p0RK4UhG078252@skunkworks.freebsd.org>
X-Authentication-Warning: skunkworks.freebsd.org: perforce set sender to
	trasz@freebsd.org using -f
From: Edward Tomasz Napierala <trasz@FreeBSD.org>
To: Perforce Change Reviews <perforce@freebsd.org>
Precedence: bulk
Cc: 
Subject: PERFORCE change 188239 for review
X-BeenThere: p4-projects@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
List-Id: p4 projects tree changes <p4-projects.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/p4-projects>,
	<mailto:p4-projects-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/p4-projects>
List-Post: <mailto:p4-projects@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:p4-projects-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/p4-projects>,
	<mailto:p4-projects-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 20:04:30 -0000

http://p4web.freebsd.org/@@188239?ac=10

Change 188239 by trasz@trasz_victim on 2011/01/27 20:04:15

	Update TODO.

Affected files ...

.. //depot/projects/soc2009/trasz_limits/TODO#42 edit

Differences ...

==== //depot/projects/soc2009/trasz_limits/TODO#42 (text+ko) ====

@@ -1,6 +1,8 @@
 TODO:
 
- - Fix %CPU limits for shortly living processes.
+ - RCTL accesses resource usage information without holding container_lock.
+
+ - Fix cpu throttling.
 
  - 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
@@ -12,7 +14,8 @@
  - Get rid of container_lock.  Atomic instructions would be nice, but we really
    need 64 bits (per-process counters could be 32 bit, I guess, but the higher
    level containers could overflow), and atomic(9) doesn't support 64 bit values
-   on 32 bit platforms.
+   on 32 bit platforms.  Code ported from SunOS seems to use (and implement)
+   64 bit atomics.
 
  - Don't account resources for system processes.  It's not as easy as checking
    for P_SYSTEM flag, as the flag will be set for AIO kernel processes.
@@ -23,6 +26,11 @@
  - The jailstat(1)/userstat(1) tool seems to use lots of CPU time.  Rewriting
    it in C could make sense.
 
+ - Currently limit enforcement involves walking over the list of rules applicable
+   to the process.  I expect the number of such rules to be small (about five),
+   but some optimisation could be in order.  Maybe a list of pointers to rules,
+   one entry per resource?
+
 Issues:
 
  - Setting RSS limit too low can make the system thrash to death.
@@ -68,7 +76,7 @@
 
  - What about RLIMIT_RTPRIO and RLIMIT_RTTIME?  Linux seems to have these.
 
-HRL-specific issues:
+RCTL-specific issues:
 
  - Reconsider bringing back setrlimit(2) handling.