linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Apply memory policies to top two highest zones when highest zone is ZONE

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: <20070806215541.GC6142@skynet.ie>
Date:	Mon, 6 Aug 2007 22:55:41 +0100
From:	mel@...net.ie (Mel Gorman)
To:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Lee.Schermerhorn@...com,
	clameter@....com, kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Apply memory policies to top two highest zones when highest zone is ZONE_MOVABLE

On (06/08/07 22:31), Andi Kleen didst pronounce:
> 
> > If correct, I would suggest merging the horrible hack for .23 then taking
> > it out when we merge "grouping pages by mobility".  But what if we don't do
> > that merge?
> 
> Or disable ZONE_MOVABLE until it is usable?

It's usable now. The issue with policies only occurs if the user specifies
kernelcore= or movablecore= on the command-line. Your language suggests
that you believe policies are not applied when ZONE_MOVABLE is configured
at build-time.

> I don't think we have the
> infrastructure to really use it anyways, so it shouldn't make too much difference
> in terms of features. And it's not that there is some sort of deadline
> around for it. 
> 
> Or mark it CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL with a warning that it'll break NUMA. But disabling 
> is probably better.
> 

Saying it breaks NUMA is a excessively strong language. It doesn't break
policies in that they still get applied to the highest zone. If kernelcore=
or movablecore= is not specified, the behaviour doesn't change.

> Then for .24 or .25 a better solution can be developed.
> 

The better solution in my mind is to always filter the zonelist instead
of applying them only for MPOL_BIND zonelists as the hack does.

> I would prefer that instead of merging bandaid horrible hacks -- they have
> a tendency to stay around.

-- 
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/