linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] mm, sysctl: make NUMA stats configurable

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:   Tue, 10 Oct 2017 07:29:31 -0700
From:   Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>, kemi <kemi.wang@...el.com>
Cc:     "Luis R . Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Christopher Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...el.com>,
        Andi Kleen <andi.kleen@...el.com>,
        Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
        Ying Huang <ying.huang@...el.com>,
        Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@...el.com>,
        Proc sysctl <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm, sysctl: make NUMA stats configurable

On 10/09/2017 10:49 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 09-10-17 09:55:49, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> I haven't checked closely but what happens (or should happen) when you
>> do a partial read? Should you get an inconsistent results? Or is this
>> impossible?
> Well, after thinking about it little bit more, partial reads are always
> inconsistent so this wouldn't add a new problem.
> 
> Anyway I still stand by my position that this sounds over-engineered and
> a simple 0/1 resp. on/off interface would be both simpler and safer. If
> anybody wants an auto mode it can be added later (as a value 2 resp.
> auto).

0/1 with the default set to the strict, slower mode?