From: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
Ananth Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@in.ibm.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@redhat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, utrace-devel@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] utrace/ptrace
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2009 11:55:32 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091223195532.8E65316DB@magilla.sf.frob.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Andi Kleen's message of Wednesday, 23 December 2009 20:47:12 +0100 <20091223194712.GO20539@basil.fritz.box>
> Do you have an estimate or better numbers how the overhead of
> seccomp-over-utrace compares to the current in-tree seccomp?
I never measured it. I would estimate that any difference one way or
another is in the noise. The point of seccomp is to run a process that
almost never makes any system calls. The only effects of utrace for that
use are on the system call path itself, and the essential effects there
(i.e. taking the tracing path vs the hot path) are the same as what the old
seccomp implementation does.
If you have some example uses of seccomp or something that can serve as a
benchmark for it, I would be glad to measure the difference.
Thanks,
Roland
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-12-23 19:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-12-18 1:11 Oleg Nesterov
2009-12-22 21:58 ` Andrew Morton
2009-12-23 17:42 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-12-23 19:33 ` Roland McGrath
2009-12-23 19:47 ` Andi Kleen
2009-12-23 19:55 ` Roland McGrath [this message]
[not found] <1319782550.2227981262142487066.JavaMail.root@zmail06.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com>
2009-12-30 3:09 ` caiqian
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=20091223195532.8E65316DB@magilla.sf.frob.com \
--to=roland@redhat.com \
--cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ananth@in.ibm.com \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=fche@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=utrace-devel@redhat.com \
/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®