linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] MM: Make page tables relocatable -- conditional flush (rc9)

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: <d43160c70804290627g77a74e48k5a383dd441177293@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 29 Apr 2008 09:27:53 -0400
From:	"Ross Biro" <rossb@...gle.com>
To:	"Christoph Lameter" <clameter@....com>
Cc:	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, mel@...net.ie,
	apm@...doween.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] MM: Make page tables relocatable -- conditional flush (rc9)

On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 3:22 PM, Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com> wrote:
>  The patch is interesting because it would allow the moving of page table
>  pages into MOVABLE sections and reduce the size of the UNMOVABLE
>  allocations signficantly (Ross: We need some numbers here). This in turn

Is there a standard test used to evaluate kernel memory fragmentation?
 I'm sure I can rig up a test to create huge amounts of fragmentation
with about 1/2 the pages being page tables.  However, I doubt that it
would reflect any real loads.  Similarly, if I check the memory
fragmentation on my test system right after it's been booted, I won't
see much fragmentation and page tables won't be causing any trouble.

    Ross
--
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/