lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 21:50:34 -0400 From: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com> To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> Cc: elladan@...imo.com, peterz@...radead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tytso@....edu, kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, linux-mm@...ck.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] vmscan: evict use-once pages first (v2) On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 18:13:40 -0700 Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote: > On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 20:59:36 -0400 > Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 17:45:36 -0700 > > Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote: > > > > > Were you able to tell whether altering /proc/sys/vm/swappiness > > > appropriately regulated the rate at which the mapped page count > > > decreased? > > > > That should not make a difference at all for mapped file > > pages, after the change was merged that makes the VM ignores > > the referenced bit of mapped active file pages. > > > > Ever since the split LRU code was merged, all that the > > swappiness controls is the aggressiveness of file vs > > anonymous LRU scanning. > > Which would cause exactly the problem Elladan saw? Yes. It was not noticable in the initial split LRU code, but after we decided to ignore the referenced bit on active file pages and deactivate pages regardless, it has gotten exacerbated. That change was very good for scalability, so we should not undo it. However, we do need to put something in place to protect the working set from streaming IO. > > Currently the kernel has no effective code to protect the > > page cache working set from streaming IO. Elladan's bug > > report shows that we do need some kind of protection... > > Seems to me that reclaim should treat swapcache-backed mapped mages in > a similar fashion to file-backed mapped pages? Swapcache-backed pages are not on the same set of LRUs as file-backed mapped pages. Furthermore, there is no streaming IO on the anon LRUs like there is on the file LRUs. Only the file LRUs need (and want) use-once replacement, which means that we only need special protection of the working set for file-backed pages. When we implement working set protection, we might as well do it for frequently accessed unmapped pages too. There is no reason to restrict this protection to mapped pages. -- All rights reversed. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists