linux-kernel - Re: x86: 4kstacks default

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]

Date:	Thu, 24 Apr 2008 14:25:19 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	T David Chinner <dgc@....com>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: x86: 4kstacks default

On Thu, 2008-04-24 at 05:52 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

> > I wonder if the direct reclaim path should avoid direct reclaim if the stack has only X bytes left.
> > (where the value of X is... well we can figure that one out later)
> 
> Actually direct reclaim should be totally avoided for complex
> filesystems.  It's horrible for the stack and for the filesystem
> writeout policy and ondisk allocation strategies.

That's basically any reclaim, even kswapd will ruin policy and block
allocation smarts.

--
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/