linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] fadvise: implement POSIX_FADV

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, 16 Feb 2012 11:07:37 -0800
From:	Arun Sharma <asharma@...com>
To:	Andrea Righi <andrea@...terlinux.com>
CC:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Johannes Weiner <jweiner@...hat.com>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>,
	Pádraig Brady <P@...igBrady.com>,
	John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
	Jerry James <jamesjer@...terlinux.com>,
	Julius Plenz <julius@...nz.com>, linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	<linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] fadvise: implement POSIX_FADV_NOREUSE

On 2/16/12 10:57 AM, Andrea Righi wrote:

> Maybe we should try to push ...something... in the memcg code for the
> short-term future, make it as much generic as possible, and for the
> long-term try to reuse the same feature (totally or in part) in the
> per-fd approach via fadvise().

Yes - the two approaches are complementary and we should probably pursue 
both.

There are a number of apps which are already using fadvise though:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAPREDUCE-3289
http://highscalability.com/blog/2012/1/12/peregrine-a-map-reduce-framework-for-iterative-and-pipelined.html

and probably many other similar cases that are not open source.

Some of these apps may be better off using NOREUSE instead of DONTNEED, 
since they may not have a clue on what else is going on in the system.

The way I think about it: NOREUSE is a statement about what my process 
is doing and DONTNEED is a statement about the entire system.

  -Arun
--
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/