linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Avoid the use of congestion

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 15 Mar 2010 13:09:35 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Christian Ehrhardt <ehrhardt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
	Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, gregkh@...ell.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Avoid the use of congestion_wait under zone
 pressure

On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 13:34:50 +0100
Christian Ehrhardt <ehrhardt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> c) If direct reclaim did reasonable progress in try_to_free but did not
> get a page, AND there is no write in flight at all then let it try again
> to free up something.
> This could be extended by some kind of max retry to avoid some weird
> looping cases as well.
> 
> d) Another way might be as easy as letting congestion_wait return
> immediately if there are no outstanding writes - this would keep the 
> behavior for cases with write and avoid the "running always in full 
> timeout" issue without writes.

They're pretty much equivalent and would work.  But there are two
things I still don't understand:

1: Why is direct reclaim calling congestion_wait() at all?  If no
writes are going on there's lots of clean pagecache around so reclaim
should trivially succeed.  What's preventing it from doing so?

2: This is, I think, new behaviour.  A regression.  What caused it?

--
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/