linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] Provide control over unmapped pages (v4)

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:	Thu, 10 Feb 2011 14:41:44 +0900
From:	Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>
To:	balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc:	linux-mm@...ck.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, npiggin@...nel.dk,
	kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, cl@...ux.com,
	kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] Provide control over unmapped pages (v4)

I don't know why the part of message is deleted only when I send you.
Maybe it's gmail bug.

I hope mail sending is successful in this turn. :)

On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 2:33 PM, Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com> wrote:
> Sorry for late response.
>
> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 8:18 PM, Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>> * MinChan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com> [2011-01-28 16:24:19]:
>>
>>> >
>>> > But the assumption for LRU order to change happens only if the page
>>> > cannot be successfully freed, which means it is in some way active..
>>> > and needs to be moved no?
>>>
>>> 1. holded page by someone
>>> 2. mapped pages
>>> 3. active pages
>>>
>>> 1 is rare so it isn't the problem.
>>> Of course, in case of 3, we have to activate it so no problem.
>>> The problem is 2.
>>>
>>
>> 2 is a problem, but due to the size aspects not a big one. Like you
>> said even lumpy reclaim affects it. May be the reclaim code could
>> honour may_unmap much earlier.
>
> Even if it is, it's a trade-off to get a big contiguous memory. I
> don't want to add new mess. (In addition, lumpy is weak by compaction
> as time goes by)
> What I have in mind for preventing LRU ignore is that put the page
> into original position instead of head of lru. Maybe it can help the
> situation both lumpy and your case. But it's another story.
>
> How about the idea?
>
> I borrow the idea from CFLRU[1]
> - PCFLRU(Page-Cache First LRU)
>
> When we allocates new page for page cache, we adds the page into LRU's tail.
> When we map the page cache into page table, we rotate the page into LRU's head.
>
> So, inactive list's result is following as.
>
> M.P : mapped page
> N.P : none-mapped page
>
> HEAD-M.P-M.P-M.P-M.P-N.P-N.P-N.P-N.P-N.P-TAIL
>
> Admin can set threshold window size which determines stop reclaiming
> none-mapped page contiguously.
>
> I think it needs some tweak of page cache/page mapping functions but
> we can use kswapd/direct reclaim without change.
>
> Also, it can change page reclaim policy totally but it's just what you
> want, I think.
>
> [1] http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.100.6188&rep=rep1&type=pdf
>
>>
>> --
>>        Three Cheers,
>>        Balbir
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Kind regards,
> Minchan Kim
>



-- 
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim
--
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/