linux-kernel - Re: [00/17] Large Blocksize Support V3

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: <20070426180358.GG2017@kernel.dk>
Date:	Thu, 26 Apr 2007 20:03:58 +0200
From:	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
To:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
Cc:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
	David Chinner <dgc@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Mel Gorman <mel@...net.ie>,
	William Lee Irwin III <wli@...omorphy.com>,
	Badari Pulavarty <pbadari@...il.com>,
	Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [00/17] Large Blocksize Support V3

On Thu, Apr 26 2007, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > Iff we really the larger physical page size to support the hardware
> > then it makes sense to go down a path of larger pages.  But it doesn't.
> 
> You are redefining the problem. We need larger physical sizes to support 
> the hardware. Yes. We can dodge the issue with shim layers and hacks. It 
> is obvious from the kernel sources that this is needed.

We definitely don't. Larger sizes are ONE way to solve the problem, they
are definitely not the only one. If the larger pages become unfeasible
for some reason (be it fragmentation, or just because the design isn't
good), then we can solve it differently.

-- 
Jens Axboe

-
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/