| 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
| ||
|
Date: 14 Aug 2007 22:02:23 +0200 From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> To: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com> Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC 4/9] Atomic reclaim: Save irq flags in vmscan.c Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com> writes: > Reclaim can be called with interrupts disabled in atomic reclaim. > vmscan.c is currently using spinlock_irq(). Switch to spin_lock_irqsave(). I like the idea in principle. If this fully works out we could potentially keep less memory free by default which would be a good thing in general: free memory is bad memory. But would be interesting to measure what the lock changes do to interrupt latency. Probably nothing good. A more benign alternative might be to just set a per CPU flag during these critical sections and then only do atomic reclaim on a local interrupt when the flag is not set. That would make it a little less reliable, but much less intrusive and with some luck still give many of the benefits. -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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists