linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/11] Add __GFP_MOVABLE flag and update callers

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]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0611251143080.19594@skynet.skynet.ie>
Date:	Sat, 25 Nov 2006 11:47:17 +0000 (GMT)
From:	Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
To:	Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>,
	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>,
	Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/11] Add __GFP_MOVABLE flag and update callers

On Fri, 24 Nov 2006, Hugh Dickins wrote:

> On Fri, 24 Nov 2006, Mel Gorman wrote:
>>
>> Good catch. In the page clustering patches I work on, I am doing this;
>>
>> -       page = alloc_page_vma(gfp | __GFP_ZERO, &pvma, 0);
>> +       page = alloc_page_vma(
>> +                       set_migrateflags(gfp | __GFP_ZERO, __GFP_RECLAIMABLE),
>> +                                                               &pvma, 0);
>>
>> to get rid of the MOVABLE flag and replace it with __GFP_RECLAIMABLE. This
>> clustered the allocations together with allocations like inode cache. In
>> retrospect, this was not a good idea because it assumes that tmpfs and shmem
>> pages are short-lived. That may not be the case at all.
>> ...
>> Thanks for that clarification. I suspected that something like this was the
>> case when I removed the MOVABLE flag and used RECLAIMABLE but I wasn't 100%
>> certain. In the tests I was running, tmpfs pages weren't a major problem so I
>> didn't chase it down.
>
> I'm fairly confused as to what MOVABLE versus RECLAIMABLE is supposed to
> be meaning, and understand it's in flux, so haven't tried too hard.

A MOVABLE allocation may be moved with page migration or paged out by 
kswapd.

RECLAIMABLE on the other hand applies to short-lived allocations (like a 
socket buffer) or allocations for slab caches that may be reaped such as 
inode caches or dcache.

> Just
> so long as you understand that tmpfs data pages go out to swap under memory
> pressure, whereas ramfs pages do not, and tmpfs swap vector pages do not.
>

Right, I'll take a much closer look with this in mind and make the 
distinction. Thanks

-- 
Mel Gorman
Part-time Phd Student                          Linux Technology Center
University of Limerick                         IBM Dublin Software Lab
-
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/