linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] mm, vmscan: Batch removal of mappings under a single lock during reclaim

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:   Fri, 16 Sep 2016 11:33:00 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
        Ying Huang <ying.huang@...el.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] mm, vmscan: Batch removal of mappings under a single
 lock during reclaim

On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 6:25 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> So, once upon a time, in a galaxy far away,..  I did a concurrent
> pagecache patch set that replaced the tree_lock with a per page bit-
> spinlock and fine grained locking in the radix tree.

I'd love to see the patch for that. I'd be a bit worried about extra
locking in the trivial cases (ie multi-level locking when we now take
just the single mapping lock), but if there is some smart reason why
that doesn't happen, then..

                Linus