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:	Wed, 18 May 2016 14:46:16 +0200
From:	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To:	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc:	linux-mm@...ck.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 11/13] mm, compaction: add the ultimate direct compaction
 priority

On 05/16/2016 09:17 AM, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>> >Wouldn't it be better to pull the prio check into compaction_deferred
>> >directly? There are more callers and I am not really sure all of them
>> >would behave consistently.
> I'll check, thanks.

Hm so the other callers of compaction_deferred() are in the context 
where there's no direct compaction priority set. They would have to pass 
something like DEF_COMPACT_PRIORITY. That starts getting subtle so I'd 
rather not go that way.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ