On Thu, 2005-02-10 at 18:09 -0800, Matt Mackall wrote: > On Thu, Feb 10, 2005 at 04:47:27PM -0800, Chris Wright wrote: > > * Matt Mackall ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > What happened to the RT rlimit code from Chris? > > > > I still have it, but I had the impression Ingo didn't like it as a long > > term solution/hack (albeit small) to the scheduler. Whereas the rt-lsm > > patch is wholly self-contained. > > I think it's important to recognize that we're trying to address an > issue that has a much wider potential audience than pro audio users, > and not very far off - what is high end audio performance today will be > expected desktop performance next year. > > So I think it's critical that we find solution that's appropriate for > _every single box_, because realistically vendors are going to ship > with this "wholly self-contained" feature turned on by default next > year, at which point the "containment" will be nil and whatever warts > it has will be with us forever. > > The rlimit stuff is not perfect, but it's a much better fit for the > UNIX model generally, which is a fairly big win. Having it in the > system unconditionally doesn't trigger the gag reflex in quite the > same way as the LSM approach. >
Without considering the userspace aspect, RT rlimits is the best implementation I have seen. All others either break RT scheduling semantics, or don't allow any way for root to maintain control of the system after giving out RT privileges. http://mobile.yahoo.com.au - Yahoo! Mobile - Check & compose your email via SMS on your Telstra or Vodafone mobile. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
