linux-kernel - Re: [-mm][PATCH 1/10] fix UNEVICTABLE_LRU and !PROC_PAGE

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: <20080703145454.B963.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date:	Thu, 03 Jul 2008 15:02:23 +0900
From:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Benjamin Kidwell <benjkidwell@...oo.com>
Subject: Re: [-mm][PATCH 1/10] fix UNEVICTABLE_LRU and !PROC_PAGE_MONITOR build

> >  config UNEVICTABLE_LRU
> >  	bool "Add LRU list to track non-evictable pages"
> >  	default y
> > +	select PAGE_WALKER
> 
> So what do we do?  Make UNEVICTABLE_LRU depend on CONFIG_MMU?  That
> would be even worse than what we have now.

I'm not sure about what do we do. but I'd prefer "depends on MMU".
because current munlock implementation need pagewalker.
So, munlock rewriting have high risk rather than change depend on.

Rik, What do you think?



--
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/