linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 0/8] Cpuset aware writeback

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: <200701170901.58757.ak@suse.de>
Date:	Wed, 17 Jan 2007 09:01:58 +1100
From:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
To:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
Cc:	akpm@...l.org, Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Paul Jackson <pj@....com>, Dave Chinner <dgc@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/8] Cpuset aware writeback


> Secondly we modify the dirty limit calculation to be based
> on the acctive cpuset.

The global dirty limit definitely seems to be a problem
in several cases, but my feeling is that the cpuset is the wrong unit
to keep track of it. Most likely it should be more fine grained.

> If we are in a cpuset then we select only inodes for writeback
> that have pages on the nodes of the cpuset.

Is there any indication this change helps on smaller systems
or is it purely a large system optimization?

> B. We add a new counter NR_UNRECLAIMABLE that is subtracted
>    from the available pages in a node. This allows us to
>    accurately calculate the dirty ratio even if large portions
>    of the node have been allocated for huge pages or for
>    slab pages.

That sounds like a useful change by itself.

-Andi
-
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/