From: Bron Gondwana <brong@fastmail.fm>
To: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de>, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>,
Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@googlemail.com>,
Bron Gondwana <brong@fastmail.fm>
Subject: Re: [patch] drop epoll max_user_instances and rely only on max_user_watches
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 19:42:10 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090129084210.GA2704@brong.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0901282010250.21401@alien.or.mcafeemobile.com>
On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 08:56:07PM -0800, Davide Libenzi wrote:
> Linus suggested to put limits where the money is, and max_user_watches
> already does that w/out the need of max_user_instances. That has the
> advantage to mitigate the potential DoS while allowing pretty generous
> default behavior.
> Allowing top 4% of low memory (per user) to be allocated in epoll
> watches, we have:
>
> LOMEM MAX_WATCHES (per user)
> 512MB ~178000
> 1GB ~356000
> 2GB ~712000
>
> A box with 512MB of lomem, will meet some challenge in hitting 180K
> watches, socket buffers math teaches us.
> No more max_user_instances limits then.
Excellent. Glad to see :) Saves me from keeping on working on my "only
account epoll within epoll for max_user_instances" patch, which would
have just been needless complexity (though cheap - is_file_epoll looks
pretty easy to check for both descriptors) - and I hadn't even compiled
and tested it yet.
Thanks Davide - this will keep our mxes humming along happily.
Bron.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-29 8:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-29 4:56 Davide Libenzi
2009-01-29 8:42 ` Bron Gondwana [this message]
2009-01-29 8:57 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-29 10:03 ` Michael Kerrisk
2009-01-29 18:14 ` Greg KH
2009-01-29 18:54 ` Davide Libenzi
2009-02-01 1:26 ` Michael Kerrisk
2009-02-01 1:30 ` Davide Libenzi
2009-02-01 1:43 ` Michael Kerrisk
2009-02-01 1:49 ` Davide Libenzi
2009-01-29 18:46 ` Davide Libenzi
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090129084210.GA2704@brong.net \
--to=brong@fastmail.fm \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=davidel@xmailserver.org \
--cc=gregkh@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mtk.manpages@googlemail.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=w@1wt.eu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®