From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S271622AbRHPTXG>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 15:23:06 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S271623AbRHPTW4>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 15:22:56 -0400
Received: from [213.97.137.182] ([213.97.137.182]:29197 "HELO
	iceberg.activanet.net") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP
	id <S271622AbRHPTWn>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 15:22:43 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
From: Eduardo =?iso-8859-1?q?Cort=E9s=20?= <the_beast@softhome.net>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Re: limit cpu
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 21:22:55 +0200
X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.1]
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108161853020.19342-100000@coffee.psychology.mcmaster.ca>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108161853020.19342-100000@coffee.psychology.mcmaster.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Message-Id: <20010816192250Z271622-760+2546@vger.kernel.org>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thursday 16 August 2001 20:54, you wrote:
> > If somebody want to develope it, a lot of thanks. I see scheduler could
> > be better with this feature, opinions?
>
> one excellent reason noone has bothered with it is that hardware
> is dirt cheap.  it's extremely unusual these days to find a machine
> where hostile users are given shell accounts.  for non-hostile
> situations (my lab, for instance), or for servers, the feature is
> useless.
at server level, this feature will be used for virtual hosts (a lot of 
ISP's). Could be used at home for security reason limitting any user 95-97%, 
and box will be more secure. A lot of people use applications (for XFree) 
that could crash the box for this reason.