Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2014 13:43:23 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <20141123.134323.1154795102254868842.davem@davemloft.net>
To: mst@redhat.com
Cc: pagupta@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        jasowang@redhat.com, dgibson@redhat.com, vfalico@gmail.com,
        edumazet@google.com, vyasevic@redhat.com, hkchu@google.com,
        wuzhy@linux.vnet.ibm.com, xemul@parallels.com, therbert@google.com,
        bhutchings@solarflare.com, xii@google.com, stephen@networkplumber.org,
        jiri@resnulli.us, sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-net 0/4] Increase the limit of tuntap queues
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
In-Reply-To: <20141123104623.GA31915@redhat.com>
References: <20141119.151628.768548269128919029.davem@davemloft.net>
	<20141119204427.GB30994@redhat.com>
	<20141123104623.GA31915@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org

From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2014 12:46:23 +0200

> At the moment attaching/detaching queues is an unpriveledged operation.
> 
> Shouldn't we worry that an application can cause large
> allocations, and provide a way to limit these?
> 
> David, could you comment on this please?

I don't want arbitrary limits imposed.

Where does this "application" run?  If it's in the host, then who
cares?  If they suck up all of their available memory with queue
resources, it's their problem.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/