[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1158880165.26347.132.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 09:09:25 +1000
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
Cc: Mike Waychison <mikew@...gle.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] page fault retry with NOPAGE_RETRY
On Thu, 2006-09-21 at 15:41 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 08:05:04 +1000
> Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org> wrote:
>
> > > So I think there's a nasty DoS here if we permit infinite retries. But
> > > it's not just that - there might be other situations under really heavy
> > > memory pressure where livelocks like this can occur. It's just a general
> > > robustness-of-implementation issue.
> >
> > Got it. Now, changing args to no_page() will be a pretty big task....
> >
>
> Not as big as removing the pt_regs arg from every interrupt handler ;)
Which is a change I'm not 100% convinced about btw ... I remember
actually using that in a few occasions... mostly for debugging though.
Bah, anyway, I suppose we can always have a per-cpu global with the last
irq pt_regs pointer if really needed for debug.
> But pretty mechanical. Problem is, I don't think we have our mechanic.
Yup, we would need to decide what to put in there....
Ben.
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists