linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] introduce kcompactd and stop compacting in kswapd

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 10 Mar 2016 09:38:55 +0100
From:	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To:	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc:	linux-mm@...ck.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] introduce kcompactd and stop compacting in kswapd

On 03/09/2016 04:52 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 08-02-16 14:38:06, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>> The previous RFC is here [1]. It didn't have a cover letter, so the description
>> and results are in the individual patches.
>
> FWIW I think this is a step in the right direction. I would give my

Thanks!

> Acked-by to all patches but I wasn't able to find time for a deep review
> and my lack of knowledge of compaction details doesn't help much. I do
> agree that conflating kswapd with compaction didn't really work out well
> and fixing this would just make the code more complex and would more
> prone to new bugs.

Yeah, it seems that direct reclaim/compaction is complex enough already...

> In future we might want to invent something similar
> to watermarks and set an expected level of high order pages prepared for
> the allocation (e.g. have at least XMB of memory in order-9+). kcompact
> then could try as hard as possible to provide them. Does that sound at
> least doable?

Sure, that was/is part of the plan. But I was trimming the series for 
initial merge over the past year to arrive at a starting point where 
reaching consensus is easier.

> Thanks!
>