This application is a reissue application for U.S. Pat. No. 6,907,421, issued from U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/572,672 filed on May 16, 2000, which incorporates by reference the entirety of the following patent applications: U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/500,212, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,560,613 entitled “Disambiguating File Descriptors,” filed on Feb. 8, 2000; U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/499,098, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,529,985 entitled “Selective Interception of System Calls,” filed on Feb. 4, 2000; and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/452,286, now pending entitled “Providing Quality of Service Guarantees to Virtual Hosts,” filed on Nov. 30, 1999. The incorporated applications have the same assignee as the present application.
1. Field of Invention
The present invention relates generally to regulating access rates in a computer system, and specifically to regulating file access rates of software processes according to file type.
2. Background of Invention
Multitasking operating systems such as UNIX® and Microsoft WINDOWS NT®are widely utilized in commercial computing systems. Among their many commercial uses, these operating systems are commonly deployed on Internet and other network server computers. With the popularity and success of the Internet, server computer operating systems are currently of great commercial importance.
One function of a multitasking operating system is to allocate system resources to the multiple software processes that simultaneously execute under the control of the operating system. Control over the allocation of system resources by an operating system is commercially useful for a number of reasons. Multitasking operating system are commonly used on Internet web servers by Internet Service Providers (ISP's). Where an ISP provides host services to multiple customers on a single physical computer, it is desirable to allot to each virtual host a specific amount of computer resources appropriate to the needs of the customer, and preferably based upon the amount paid for the services.
For example, suppose two customers purchase host services from an ISP. The first customer is a large corporation providing financial services to thousands of clients internationally. The financial services host requires fast file access, as well as prompt response time to all client requests. Of course, the first customer is willing to compensate the ISP appropriately for providing such a level of host services. The second customer is a sole proprietorship that sells floral arrangements locally. The second customer has a very limited budget, but only requires minimal computer resources. Clearly, it is desirable for the ISP to allocate different percentages of the system resources to the two separate virtual hosts provided by the ISP for the two separate customers.
In the example above, the ISP may wish to provide the financial services host with the ability to access files at the rate of 1,000 bytes per second, but to allow the florist to access files at the rate of only 150 bytes per second. These different access rates would be based upon the different needs of the two customers, and the corresponding different compensation schemes of each. As multitasking operating systems operate today, it would be impossible for the ISP to regulate the file access rates of the different customers. Each process associated with either virtual host simply accesses the file system at the same unregulated rate, and thus it is impossible for the ISP to guarantee or restrict access rates based upon customer need and corresponding financial arrangement. What is needed is a method that facilitates the regulation of the rate at which individual processes access the file system of a multitasking operating system.
Many commercially popular operating systems such as UNIX® and Microsoft WINDOWS NT® treat communication channels as files. In such an operating system, when a process instructs the operating system to create a communication channel, the operating system returns a file descriptor. The communication channel is subsequently accessed via the file descriptor, in a similar manner as a file stored on media.
Communication channels and files stored on media are inherently different, despite the fact that both are accessed via file descriptors. It is often desirable to for an ISP to allow a single process to access files stored on media at one rate, and to access communication channels at another. For example, a customer of the ISP may need to receive and respond to client requests very quickly, but need only an average access time for files stored on the system storage device(s). Such a customer would require (and be willing to pay for) a fast communication channel access rate, but only need (and be willing to pay for) a slower access rate to files stored on media.
Multitasking operating systems today are not capable of regulating the file access rates of different processes generally, much less facilitating different access rates for specific processes based on file type. Currently, each process accesses both files stored on media and communication channels at unregulated rates, not controlled by the operating system. Thus, it is impossible for the ISP to provide customers with different access rates for files stored on media and for communication channels, based upon customer need and corresponding financial arrangement. What is further needed is a method that not only facilitates the regulation of the rate at which individual processes access the file system of a multitasking operating system, but which also allows processes to be regulated to different access rates for different file types.
It is further desirable to not only be able to set separate access rates for communication channels and files stored on media, but to be able set separate access rates for file types generally. Under some operating systems, entities other than communication channels and files stored on media are treated as files, and hence need separate access rates. For example, under the UNIX® operating system, hardware devices are treated as files. For the same reasons that it is desirable to set separate access rates for communication channels and files stored on media, it is further desirable to be able to set a separate access rate for any type of file. Accordingly, what is needed is a method to set separate access rates for individual processes according to file type.
The present invention allows regulation of the file access rates of processes according to file type. An association data structure stores associations between processes to be regulated and specific access rates for various file types. In order to regulate processes to their associated access rates, system calls that access files are intercepted. When a process to be regulated makes a system call that accesses a file, the system call is intercepted, and a system call wrapper executes instead. The system call wrapper determines the type of file that is being accessed by the process. The system call wrapper examines the association table in order to determine if the calling process is associated with an access rate for that file type. If not, then the process is not to be regulated for that file type, in which case the system call wrapper simply allows the file access to proceed. Otherwise, the system call wrapper regulates the rate of the access to the file according to the appropriate rate.
The features and advantages described in this summary and the following detailed description are not all-inclusive, and particularly, many additional features and advantages will be apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of the drawings, specification, and claims hereof. Moreover, it should be noted that the language used in the specification has been principally selected for readability and instructional purposes, and may not have been selected to delineate or circumscribe the inventive subject matter, resort to the claims being necessary to determine such inventive subject matter.
The figures depict embodiments of the present invention for purposes of illustration only. One skilled in the art will readily recognize from the following discussion that alternative embodiments of the structures and methods illustrated herein may be employed without departing from the principles of the invention described herein.
Preferably, a data structure for storing associations 129 between processes 107 and access rates for file types is inserted into the operating system 117. In one embodiment, the data structure is an association table 127, but in other embodiments other data structures are utilized, for example a linked list. In one embodiment, the association table 127 (or other data structure) is dynamically loaded into the operating system kernel 109, while the kernel 109 is active. In another embodiment, the association table 127 is stored in user address space 103. The maintenance and use of the association table 127 is discussed in detail below.
In order to regulate file access rates, system calls 115 that access files are intercepted. A system call wrapper 111 is utilized in order to intercept system calls 115. In one embodiment, the system call wrapper 111 is dynamically loaded into the operating system kernel 109, while the kernel 109 is active. In another embodiment, the system call wrapper is loaded in user address space 103. The system call wrapper 111 is preferably in the form of object code, the functional features of which are described in detail below.
Pointers 114 to system calls 115 are located in an operating system call vector table 113. It is to be understood that the term “system call vector table” as used herein denotes an area in operating system address space 105 in which there are stored the addresses of system calls. In the UNIX® operating system, this part of the operating system is called the “system call vector table,” and that term is used in this specification. Other operating systems employ different terminology to denote the sane system component. A system call vector table by any other name is still within the scope of the present invention.
A copy 116 is made of a pointer 114 to each system call 115 to be intercepted. These copies 116 of pointers 114 are preferably stored in operating system address space 105, but in an alternative embodiment are stored in user address space 103. Once the copies 116 have been made and saved, the pointers 114 in the system call vector table 113 to the system calls 115 to be intercepted are replaced with pointers 118 to the system call wrapper 111, such that when a system call 115 to be intercepted is made, the system call wrapper 111 executes instead. In one embodiment, this copying, storing, and replacing of pointers is performed by the system call wrapper 111. In other embodiments, copying, storing, and replacing of pointers is performed by a pointer management module executing in either operating system address space 105 or user address space 103 as desired. The pointer management module can either be a stand alone program, or a component of a larger application program as desired.
Executing alternative code when a system call 115 is made comprises intercepting the system call 115. The steps of inserting a system call wrapper 111 into the operating system 117, making a copy 116 of an operating system pointer 114 to a system call 115, and replacing the operating system pointer 114 with a pointer 118 to the system call wrapper 111 facilitate interception of a system call 115. When a system call 115 to be intercepted is made, the operating system 117 uses the pointer 118 in the system call vector table 113 to the system call wrapper 111 to execute the system call wrapper 111.
It is to be understood that only system calls 115 that access files need be intercepted, and thus only pointers 114 to system calls 115 to be intercepted are replaced with pointers 118 to the system call wrapper 111. Pointers 114 to system calls 115 which are not to be intercepted are not replaced. Thus, when a non-intercepted system call 115 is made, the system call 115 executes, not the system call wrapper 111.
In one embodiment, a single system call wrapper 111 is loaded into operating system address space 105. Thus, whenever any process 107 makes a system call 115 to be intercepted, the system call wrapper 111 executes. In another embodiment, techniques described in the “Selective Interception of System Calls” application are used to associate a specific system call wrapper 111 with each process to be regulated.
Processes 107 execute in user address space 103 under control of the operating system 117, and make system calls 115. When a process makes a system call 115 that accesses a file, the system call wrapper 111 determines the type of the file being accessed. The system call wrapper 111 also examines the association table 127 to determine whether the process 107 that made the system call 115 is associated with an access rate for that file type. If so, the system call wrapper 111 regulates the file access rate appropriately. Otherwise, the access is allowed to proceed normally. Note that even in the embodiment in which processes 107 to be regulated are associated with individual system call wrappers 111, the system call wrapper still determines if the process 107 is associated with a rate for the file type being accessed, because an individual process 107 may be regulated for some file types and not for others.
The access rate regulator program 201 modifies the operating system 117 of the computer to include the association table 127. Preferably, the regulator program 201 loads the association table 127 into the kernel 109 of the operating system 117 while the kernel is active.
For each process 107 to be regulated, the regulator program 201 stores, in the association table 127, an association 129 between the process 107 and an access rate for at least one file type. For example, suppose a process 107 associated with a financial services host is to be regulated to 1,000 bytes per second for files stored on media, and to 1,400 bytes per second for communication channels. The regulator program 201 would store two associations for the process 107, the first indicating the access rate for files stored on media (1,000 bytes per second), and the second the access rate for communication channels (1,400 bytes per second). Of course, the regulator program 201 can add, modify, and delete associations 129 from the association table 127, as desired.
A loader program is an operating system utility that is used to execute computer programs that are stored on static media. Typically, a loader program loads an executable image from static media into user address space 103 of computer memory 101, and then initiates execution of the loaded image by transferring execution to the first instruction thereof.
Like a standard loader program, the modified loader 301 loads executable images from static media into user address space 103. Additionally, the modified loader program 301 stores, in the association table 127, at least one association 129 between the process 107 and a file access rate. Thus, whenever a process 107 to be regulated is loaded, the association table 127 is updated as needed.
In other embodiments, in addition to storing associations, the modified loader program 301 uses methodology described in detail in the “Selective Interception of System Calls” application in order to associate an individual system call wrapper 111 with the loaded process 107. In different embodiments, the system call wrapper 111 associated with the process is loaded into process address space of the process, user address space 103, or operating system address space 105 as described in the “Selective Interception of System Calls” application. In each of these embodiments, whenever the process 107 makes a system call 115 to be intercepted (i.e., a system call 115 that accesses a file) the system call wrapper 111 associated with the process 107 executes, and proceeds to manage the regulation of the file access rate. Regulation of file access rate by system call wrappers 111 generally is discussed in detail below.
When a system call wrapper 111 executes, the system call wrapper determines the type of the file being accessed. Once the file type has been determined, the system call wrapper 111 examines the association table 127 to determine whether the process 107 that made the system call 115 is associated with an access rate for that file type. If so, the system call wrapper 111 regulates the file access rate appropriately. Otherwise, access of files of that type by the process 107 is not to be regulated, so the access is allowed to proceed normally. In one embodiment, the determination is made using methodology described in the “Disambiguating File Descriptors” application. Other techniques such as file extension or file name can also be used as desired.
Many techniques for regulating access rate are known. In one embodiment, the file access rate regulation module 401 uses a leaky-bucket regulator to regulate the access rate. A leaky-bucket regulator is one specific example of a technique for regulating access rates. A leaky-bucket regulator is described in An Engineering Approach to Computer Networking, Srinivasan Keshav, 1997, Addison Wesley, Chapter 7, at pp 403-405, which is incorporated herein by reference.
Data arrives at the regulator 501 as input 507 from a source. A test module 509 examines the bucket 505, to determine the sum of the sizes of the tokens 503 therein. The regulator 501 only sends the data as output to a destination 511 if the sum equals or exceeds the size of the data. When data is sent as output 511, the regulator 501 removes tokens 503 corresponding to the output 511 size from the token bucket 505.
If the sum is less than the size of the input 507, the input 507 is held as stored data 513 in a data buffer 515. Once the bucket 505 contains sufficient tokens 503, the stored data 513 is sent as output 511.
A leaky-bucket regulator 501 limits the size of a burst of output 511 to a little more D. The size can be slightly greater than D because tokens 503 may be added to the bucket 505 while output 511 equal in size to D is being sent. Over the long term, the rate at which output 511 is sent by the regulator 501 is limited by the rate R at which tokens 503 are added to the bucket 505. Thus, the leaky-bucket regulator 501 can be used to regulate a process 107 to an access rate for a file type by setting R to that access rate.
For example, suppose the system call wrapper 111 determines that the file access write for a process 107 is 1,000 bytes per second. The system call wrapper passes the rate to the leaky-bucket regulator 501, which proceeds to set R to the rate. Thus, the regulator 501 adds 1,000 byte tokens 503 to a bucket 505 at a rate of once per second. The system call wrapper 111 then routes the communication between the process 107 and the file through the regulator 501, which regulates the access rate to 1,000 bytes per second.
Note that if the process 107 is writing data to a file 403, the input to the file 405 becomes the input 507 to the leaky bucket regulator 501, and the output 511 from the leaky bucket regulator 501 is sent to the file 403. On the other hand, if the process 107 is reading data from a file 403, the output from the file 407 becomes the input 507 to the leaky bucket regulator 501, and the output 511 from the leaky bucket regulator 501 is sent to the process 107.
In other embodiments, other access rate techniques are employed by the file access rate regulation module 401, for example moving average, jumping average, or peak rate.
As will be understood by those familiar with the art, the invention may be embodied in other specific forms without departing from the spirit or essential characteristics thereof. Likewise, the particular capitalization or naming of the modules, protocols, features, attributes or any other aspect is not mandatory or significant, and the mechanisms that implement the invention or its features may have different names or formats. Accordingly, the disclosure of the present invention is intended to be illustrative, but not limiting, of the scope of the invention, which is set forth in the following claims.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3377624 | Nelson et al. | Apr 1968 | A |
4177510 | Appell et al. | Dec 1979 | A |
5189667 | Esaki et al. | Feb 1993 | A |
5212793 | Donica et al. | May 1993 | A |
5226160 | Waldron et al. | Jul 1993 | A |
5249290 | Heizer | Sep 1993 | A |
5263147 | Francisco et al. | Nov 1993 | A |
5279039 | Anderson et al. | Jan 1994 | A |
5325530 | Mohrmann | Jun 1994 | A |
5437032 | Wolf et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
5528753 | Fortin | Jun 1996 | A |
5566334 | Loader | Oct 1996 | A |
5572680 | Ikeda et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5584023 | Hsu | Dec 1996 | A |
5603020 | Hashimoto et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
5615400 | Cowsar et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5623492 | Teraslinna | Apr 1997 | A |
5636371 | Yu | Jun 1997 | A |
5640595 | Baugher et al. | Jun 1997 | A |
5692047 | McManis | Nov 1997 | A |
5706097 | Schelling et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5706453 | Cheng et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5708774 | Boden | Jan 1998 | A |
5719854 | Choudhury et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
5727147 | Van Hoff | Mar 1998 | A |
5727203 | Hapner et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5742772 | Sreenan | Apr 1998 | A |
5748614 | Wallmeier | May 1998 | A |
5752003 | Hart | May 1998 | A |
5761477 | Wahbe et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5764889 | Ault et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5781550 | Templin et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5799173 | Gossler et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5809527 | Cooper et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5828893 | Weid et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5838686 | Ozkan | Nov 1998 | A |
5838916 | Domenikos et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5842002 | Schnurer et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5845129 | Wendorf et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5850399 | Ganmukhi et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5860004 | Fowler et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5864683 | Boebert et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5889956 | Hauser et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5889996 | Adams | Mar 1999 | A |
5892968 | Iwasaki et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5905730 | Yang et al. | May 1999 | A |
5905859 | Holloway et al. | May 1999 | A |
5913024 | Green et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5915085 | Koved | Jun 1999 | A |
5915095 | Miskowiec | Jun 1999 | A |
5918018 | Gooderum et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5920699 | Bare | Jul 1999 | A |
5933603 | Vahalia et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5937159 | Meyers et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5944795 | Civanlar | Aug 1999 | A |
5953685 | Bogin et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5956481 | Walsh et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5961582 | Gaines | Oct 1999 | A |
5961583 | Van Fleet | Oct 1999 | A |
5978373 | Hoff et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5982748 | Yin et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5987242 | Bentley et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5987524 | Yoshida et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5987608 | Roskind | Nov 1999 | A |
5991812 | Srinivasan | Nov 1999 | A |
5999963 | Bruno et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6016318 | Tomoike | Jan 2000 | A |
6018527 | Yin et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6023721 | Cummings | Feb 2000 | A |
6038608 | Katsumnata | Mar 2000 | A |
6038609 | Geulen | Mar 2000 | A |
6047325 | Jain et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6055617 | Kingsbury | Apr 2000 | A |
6055637 | Hudson et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6061349 | Coile et al. | May 2000 | A |
6065118 | Bull et al. | May 2000 | A |
6075791 | Chiussi et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6075938 | Bugnion et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6078929 | Rao | Jun 2000 | A |
6078957 | Adelman et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6086623 | Broome et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6092178 | Jindal et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6094674 | Hattori et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6101543 | Alden et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6108701 | Davies et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6108759 | Orcutt et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6122673 | Basak et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6154776 | Martin | Nov 2000 | A |
6154778 | Koistinen et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6161139 | Win et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6167520 | Touboul | Dec 2000 | A |
6172981 | Cox et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6189046 | Moore et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6192389 | Ault et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6192512 | Chess | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6230203 | Koperda et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6240463 | Benmohamed et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6243825 | Gamache et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6247057 | Barrera, III | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6247068 | Kyle | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6259699 | Opalka et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6266678 | McDevitt et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6269404 | Hart et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6279039 | Bhat et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6279040 | Ma et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6282581 | Moore et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6282703 | Meth et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6286047 | Ramanathan et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6298479 | Chessin et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6308216 | Goldszmidt et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6314558 | Angel et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6327622 | Jindal et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6336138 | Caswell et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6351775 | Yu | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6353616 | Elwalid et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6363053 | Schuster et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6366958 | Ainsworth et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6370583 | Fishler et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6374292 | Srivastava et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6381228 | Prieto, Jr. et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6385638 | Baker-Harvey | May 2002 | B1 |
6385722 | Connelly et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6389448 | Primak et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6393484 | Massarani | May 2002 | B1 |
6425003 | Herzog et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6430622 | Aiken, Jr. et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6434631 | Bruno et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6434742 | Koepele, Jr. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6438134 | Chow et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6442164 | Wu | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6449647 | Colby et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6449652 | Blumenau et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6457008 | Rhee et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6463454 | Lumelsky et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6463459 | Orr et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6466985 | Goyal et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6470398 | Zargham et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6484173 | O'Hare et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6487578 | Ranganathan | Nov 2002 | B2 |
6487663 | Jaisimha et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6490670 | Collins et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6496847 | Bugnion et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6499137 | Hunt | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6499652 | Flynn et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6529950 | Lumelsky et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6529985 | Deianov et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6542167 | Darlet et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6553413 | Leoghton et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6560613 | Gylfason et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6578055 | Hutchison et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6578068 | Bowman-Amuah | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6580721 | Beshai | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6590588 | Lincke et al. | Jul 2003 | B2 |
6622159 | Chao et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6647422 | Wesinger et al. | Nov 2003 | B2 |
6658571 | O'Brien et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6691312 | Sen et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6711607 | Goyal | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6723568 | Liu et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6725456 | Bruno et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6732211 | Goyal et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
6754716 | Sharma et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6760775 | Anerousis et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6779016 | Aziz et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6785728 | Schneider et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6820117 | Johnson | Nov 2004 | B1 |
6859835 | Hipp | Feb 2005 | B1 |
6907421 | Keshav et al. | Jun 2005 | B1 |
6909691 | Goyal et al. | Jun 2005 | B1 |
6912590 | Lundback et al. | Jun 2005 | B1 |
6948003 | Newman et al. | Sep 2005 | B1 |
6968389 | Menditto et al. | Nov 2005 | B1 |
6976258 | Goyal et al. | Dec 2005 | B1 |
6981029 | Menditto et al. | Dec 2005 | B1 |
6985937 | Keshav et al. | Jan 2006 | B1 |
7117354 | Browning et al. | Oct 2006 | B1 |
7143024 | Goyal et al. | Nov 2006 | B1 |
7219354 | Huang et al. | May 2007 | B1 |
7343421 | Goyal | Mar 2008 | B1 |
RE42214 | Goyal et al. | Mar 2011 | E |
20030061338 | Stelliga | Mar 2003 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
64-002145 | Jan 1989 | JP |
WO 9939261 | Aug 1999 | WO |
WO-9939261 | Aug 1999 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Keshav, S., An Engineering Approach to Computer Networking: ATM Networks, the Internet, and the Telephone Network, Reading, MA, Addison-Wesley, 1997, pp. vii-xi, 85-115, 209-355, 395-444. |
Stevens, R. W., Unix Network Programming vol. 1 Networking APIs: Sockets and XTI, Upper Saddle River, NJ, Prentice Hall, 1998, pp. v-xiv, 29-53, 85-110, 727-760. |
Tanenbaum, A. S. and Woodhull, A. S., Operating Systems: Design and Implementation, Upper Saddle River, NJ, Prentice Hall, 1997, pp. vii-xiv, 1-46, 401-454. |
Rubini, A., Linux Device Drivers, Sebastopol, CA, O'Reilly & Associates, Inc., 1998, pp. v-x, 13-40. |
Goyal, P., et al., “A Hierarchical CPU Scheduler for Multimedia Operating Systems,” Proceedings of the Second Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementations (OSDI'96), Seattle, WA, Oct. 1996, 15 pages. |
Laurie, B. and Laurie, P., Apache The Definitive Guide, Sebastopol, CA, O'Reilly & Associates, Inc., Feb. 1999, pp. v-viii, 43-74. |
Aho, A. V. and Ullman J. D., Principles of Compiler Design, Reading, MA, 1977, pp. vii-x, 359-362, 519-522. |
Jonsson, J., “Exploring the Importance of Preprocessing Operations in Real-Time Multiprocessor Scheduling,” Proc. of the IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium—Work-in-Progress session, San Francisco, CA, Dec. 4, 1997, pp. 31-34. |
Rusling, D. A., Processes, [online], [retrieved on Dec. 7, 1999]. Retrieved from the Internet: URL: http://www.cebaf.gov/.about.saw/linux/tlk-html/node44.htm. |
Rusling, D. A., Linux Processes, [online], [retrieved on Dec. 7, 1999]. Retrieved from the Internet: URL: http://www.cebaf.gov/.about.saw/linux/tlk-html/node45.html. |
Rusling, D. A., Identifiers, [online], [retrieved on Dec. 7, 1999]. Retrieved from the Internet: URL: http://www.cebaf.gov/.about.saw/linux/tlk-html/node46.html. |
Rusling, D. A., Scheduling, [online], [retrieved on Dec. 7, 1999]. Retrieved from the Internet: URL: http://www.cebaf.gov/.about.saw/linux/tlk-html/node47.html. |
Rusling, D. A., Scheduling in Multiprocessor Systems, [online], [retrieved on Dec. 7, 1999]. Retrieved from the Internet: URL: http://www.cebaf.gov/.about.saw/linux/tlk-html/node48.html. |
Rusling, D. A., Files, [online], [retrieved on Dec. 7, 1999]. Retrieved from the Internet: URL: http://www.cebaf.gov/.about.saw/linux/tlk-html/node49.html. |
Goyal, P. et al., “Start-time Fair Queuing: A Scheduling Algorithm for Integrated Services Packet Switching Networks,” Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM '96, San Francisco, CA, Aug. 1996, 14 pages. |
Janosi, T., “Notes on ‘A Hierarchical CPU Scheduler for Multimedia Operating Systems’ by Pawan Goyal, Xingang Guo and Harrick Vin,” [online], [retrieved on May 8, 2000]. Retrieved from the Internet: URL:http://cs.cornell.edu/Info/Courses/Spring-97/CS614/goy.htm. |
Goyal, P., “Packet Scheduling Algorithms for Integrated Services Networks,” PhD Dissertation, University of Texas, Austin, TX, Aug. 1997. |
Boehm, B., “Managing Software Productivity and Reuse,” IEEE Computer, vol. 32, No. 9, Sep. 1999, 3 pages. |
Corbato, F. J. et al. “An Experimental Timesharing System,” Proceedings of the American Federation of Information Processing Societies Spring Joint Computer Conference, San Francisco, CA, May 1-3, 1962, pp. 335-344. |
Deutsch, P. and Grant, C.A., “A Flexible Measurement Tool for Software Systems,” Information Processing 71 (Proc. of the IFIP Congress), 1971, pp. 320-326. |
Edijali, G., et al., “History-based Access Control for Mobile Code,” Fifth ACM Conference on Computer and Communication Security, Nov. 3-5, 1998, 19 pages. |
Erlingsson, U. and Schneider, F. B., “SASI Enforcement of Security Policies: A Retrospective,” Proc. New Security Paradigms Workshop, Apr. 2, 1999, pp. 1-17. |
Erlingsson, U. and Schneider, F. B., IRM Enforcement of Java Stack Inspection, [online], Feb. 19, 2000, [retrieved on Apr. 2, 2002]. Retrieved from the Internet: URL: http://cs-tr.cs.cornell.edu/Dienst/UI2.0/Show Page/ncstrl.cornell/TR2000-1786. |
Evans, D. and Twyman, A., “Flexible Policy-Directed Code Safety,” Proc. of 1999 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, Oakland, CA, May 9-12, 1999, pp. 1-14. |
Fraser, T. et al., “Hardening COTS Software with Generic Software Wrappers,” Proc. of 1999 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, 1999, 15 pages. |
Goldberg, I. et al., “A Secure Environment for Untrusted Helper Applications (Confining the Wily Hacker),” Proc. of the Sixth Usenix Unix Security Symposium, San Jose, CA, Jul. 1996, 14 pages. |
Goldberg, R. P., “Survey of Virtual Machine Research,” IEEE Computer, Jun. 1974, pp. 34-45. |
Pandey, R. and Hashii, B., “Providing Fine-Grained Access Control for Mobile Programs Through Binary Editing,” Technical Report TR98 08, University of California, Davis, CA, 1998, pp. 1-22. |
Ritchie, D. M., “The Evolution of the Unix Time-Sharing System,” AT&T Bell Laboratories Technical Journal 63, No. 6, Part 2, Oct. 1984, (originally printed 1979), 11 pages. |
Saltzer, J., H. and Schroeder, M. D., The Protection of Information in Computer Systems, [online], 1973, [retrieved on Apr. 2, 2002]. Retrieved from the Internet: URL: http://www.cs.virginia.edu.about.evans/cs551/saltzer. |
Wahbe, R., et al., “Efficient Software-Based Fault Isolation,” Proc. of the Symposium on Operating System Principles, 1993, 14 pages. |
Plummer, D. C., An Ethernet Address Resolution Protocol—or—Converting Network Protocol Addresses to 48.bit Ethernet Address for Transmission on Ethernet Hardware, Nov. 1982, [online], [retrieved on Jan. 17, 2000]. Retrieved from the Internet: URL:http://www.msg.net/kadow/answers/extras/rfc/rfc826.tx. |
Huang, X. W. et al., “The Entrapid Protocol Development Environment,” Proceedings of IEEE Infocom'99, Mar. 1999, 9 pages. |
Duffield, N.G., et al., “A Flexible Model for Resource Management in Virtual Private Networks,” Computer Communication Review Conference, Computer Communication, ACM SIGCOMM '99 Conference, Cambridge, MA, Aug. 30, 1999-Sep. 3, 1999. pp. 95-108. |
Campbell, A. T. and Keshav, S., “Quality of Service in Distributed Systems,” Computer Communications 21, 1998, pp. 291-293. |
Bach, M. J., The Design of the Unix® Operating System, New Delhi, Prentice-Hall of India, 1989, pp. v-x, 19-37. |
McDougall, R., et al., “Resource Management,” Upper Saddle River, NJ, Prentice Hall, 1999, pp. iii-xix, 135-191. |
Rijsinghani, A., RFC 1624, May 1994, [online], [retrieved Feb. 2, 2000]. Retrieved from the internet: URL: http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1624.html. |
Mallory, T and Kullberg, A., RFC 1141, Jan. 1990 [online], [retrieved Feb. 2, 2000]. Retrieved from the Internet: URL: http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1141.html. |
Egevang, K. and Francis P., RFC 1631, May 1994 [online], [retrieved on Feb. 2, 2000]. Retrieved from the Internet: URL: http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1631.html. |
Goyal, P. et al., “Generalized Guaranteed Rate Scheduling Algorithms: A Framework,” IEEE/ACM Transactions, vol. 5, Issue: 4, Aug. 1997; pp. 561-571. |
Symbol Table, [online] copyright 1997, 1998, [Retrieved on Apr. 4, 2003] Retrieved from the internet < URL: http://216.239.33.100/search?q=cache:eASXk8qC—AC:www.caldera.com/developers/gabi/1998-04-29/ch4.s . . . , pp. 1-5. |
U.S. Appl. No. 09/576,393, filed May 22, 2000, Keshav et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 09/747,664, filed Dec. 22, 2000, Huang et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 09/687,031, filed Oct. 12, 2000, Gylfason et al. |
Goyal et al., “Start-time Fair Queuing: A Scheduling Algorithm for Integrated Services Packet Switching Networks”, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, vol. 5, No. 5, Oct. 1997, pp. 690-704. |
Mitra et al., “Hierarchical Virtual Partitioning—Algorithms for Virtual Private Networking”, Bell Labs Technical Journal, Spring 1997, pp. 68-81. |
Berkeley Software Distribution, “man page: setpgid”, Feb. 1, 1994, 2 pp., [Retrieved on Oct. 13, 2005], Retrieved from the Internet <URL: http://www.neosoft.com/neosoft/man/setpgid.2.html>. |
Berkeley Software Distribution, “man page: setsid”, Feb. 1, 1994, 2 pp., [Retrieved on Oct. 13, 2005], Retrieved from the Internet <URL: http://www.neosoft.com/neosoft/man/setsid.2.html>. |
Frost, J., “Unix Signals and Process Groups”, Aug. 17, 1994, 2 pp., [Retrieved on Oct. 13, 2005], Retrieved from the Internet <URL: http://www.cs.ucsb.edu/˜almeroth/classes/W99.276/assignment1/signals.html>. |
Stevens, Richard W., “Advanced Programming in the Unix® Environment”, 1993, pp. 237-246, 282-285, Addison Wesley Longman, Inc., USA. |
Bhatti, N., Friedrich, R., “Web server support for tiered services”, Network, IEEE, vol. 13, Issue 5, pp. 64-71, Sep.-Oct. 1999. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 09/572,672, mailed Mar. 15, 2004, 32 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 09/572,672, mailed Jan. 4, 2005, 13 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Supplemental Notice of Allowability, U.S. Appl. No. 09/572,672, mailed Feb. 9, 2005, 2 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 09/633,575, mailed Dec. 17, 2003, 33 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 09/633,575, mailed Sep. 27, 2004, 38 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 09/633,575, mailed Dec. 20, 2004, 7 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 09/611,877, mailed Feb. 4, 2004, 10 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 09/611,877, mailed Nov. 3, 2004, 8 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 09/611,877, mailed Mar. 15, 2005, 12 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 09/611,877, mailed Aug. 11, 2005, 9 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 09/611,877, mailed Dec. 20, 2005, 8 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 09/611,877, mailed Jun. 20, 2006, 9 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 09/611,877, mailed Sep. 25, 2006, 5 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 09/452,286, mailed Apr. 28, 2003, 23 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 09/452,286, mailed Oct. 23, 2003, 33 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 09/452,286, mailed Mar. 9, 2004, 34 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 09/452,286, mailed Oct. 14, 2004, 22 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 09/452,286, mailed Mar. 15, 2005, 11 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 09/452,286, mailed Jul. 8, 2005, 4 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 11/956,246, mailed Apr. 6, 2010, 9 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 11/956,246, mailed Aug. 23, 2010, 4 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 09/569,371, mailed Jul. 18, 2003, 14 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 09/569,371, mailed Jan. 8, 2004, 11 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 09/569,371, mailed May 10, 2004, 11 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 09/569,371, mailed Jan. 25, 2005, 13 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 09/569,371, mailed Jul. 11, 2005, 7 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 09/747,687, mailed Oct. 1, 2003, 11 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 09/747,687, mailed Mar. 25, 2004, 14 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 09/747,687, mailed Dec. 1, 2004, 15 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 09/747,687, mailed May 4, 2005, 14 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 09/747,687, mailed Nov. 1, 2005, 11 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 09/747,687, mailed Apr. 18, 2006, 10 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 09/747,687, mailed Oct. 18, 2006, 14 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 09/747,687, mailed Feb. 12, 2007, 9 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 09/499,098, mailed Sep. 24, 2002, 6 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 09/500,212, mailed Mar. 15, 2002, 16 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 09/500,212, mailed Sep. 9, 2002, 20 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 09/500,212, mailed Dec. 31, 2002, 7 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 09/502,155, mailed Apr. 14, 2003, 11 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 09/502,155, mailed Jul. 28, 2003, 10 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 09/502,155, mailed Oct. 27, 2003, 5 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 09/502,155, mailed Mar. 8, 2004, 7 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 09/664,914, mailed Dec. 12, 2003, 5 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Supplemental Notice of Allowability, U.S. Appl. No. 09/664,914, mailed Dec. 29, 2003, 2 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/971,778, mailed Oct. 12, 2010, 17 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 11/971,778, mailed Feb. 24, 2011, 5 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 12/467,137, mailed Feb. 26, 2010, 13 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 12/467,137, mailed Oct. 15, 2010, 26 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Advisory Action, U.S. Appl. No. 12/467,137, mailed Jan. 18, 2011, 4 pages. |
Pending U.S. Appl. No. 09/452,286, entitled “Providing Quality of Service Guarantees to Virtual Hosts,” filed Nov. 30, 1999. |
Pending U.S. Appl. No. 09/499,098, entitled “Selective Interception of System Calls,” filed Feb. 4, 2000. |
Pending U.S. Appl. No. 09/498,450, entitled “Dynamic Scheduling of Task Streams in a Multiple-Resource System to Ensure Task Stream Quality of Service,” filed Feb. 4, 2000. |
Pending U.S. Appl. No. 09/500,212, entitled “Disambiguating File Descriptors,” filed Feb. 8, 2000. |
Pending U.S. Appl. No. 09/502,155, entitled “Restricting Communication Between Network Devices on a Common Network,” filed Feb. 11, 2000. |
Pending U.S. Appl. No. 09/503,975, entitled “Restricting Communication of Selected Processes to a Set of Specific Network Addresses,” filed Feb. 14, 2000. |
Pending U.S. Appl. No. 09/526,980, entitled “Enabling a Service Provider to Provide Intranet Services,” filed Mar. 15, 2000. |
Pending U.S. Appl. No. 09/569,371, entitled “Dymamically Modifying the Resources of a Virtual Server,” filed May 11, 2000. |
Saltzer, J., H. and Schroeder, M. D., The Protection of Information in Computer Systems, [online], 1973, [retrieved on Apr. 2, 2002]. Retrieved from the Internet: URL: http://www.cs.virginia.edu˜evans/cs551/saltzer. |
McDougall, R., et al., Resource Management, Upper Saddle River, NJ, Prentice Hall, 1999, pp. iii-xix, 135-191. |
Goyal, Pawan et al., Generalized Guaranteed Rate Scheduling Algorithms: A Framework, IEEE/ACM Transactions, vol. 5, Issue: 4, Aug. 1997; pp. 561-571. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 09572672 | May 2000 | US |
Child | 11818544 | US |