linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] zone_reclaim is always 0 by 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20090528132800.F0F5.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date:	Thu, 28 May 2009 13:30:25 +0900 (JST)
From:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Robin Holt <holt@....com>
Cc:	kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin.zhang@...el.com>,
	Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] zone_reclaim is always 0 by default

> On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 05:06:18PM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > your last patch is one of considerable thing. but it has one weakness.
> > in general "ifdef x86" is wrong idea. almost minor architecture don't
> > have sufficient tester. the difference against x86 often makes bug.
> > Then, unnecessary difference is hated by much people.
> 
> Let me start by saying I can barely understand this entire email.
> I appreciate that english is a second language for you and you are
> doing a service to the linux community with your contributions despite
> the language barrier.  I commend you for your efforts.  I do ask that if
> there was more information contained in your email than I am replying too,
> please reword it so I may understand.
> 
> IIRC, my last patch made it an arch header option to set zone_reclaim_mode
> to any value it desired while leaving the default as 1.  The only arch
> that changed the default was x86 (both 32 and 64 bit).  That seems the
> least disruptive to existing users.
> 
> > So, I think we have two selectable choice.
> > 
> > 1. remove zone_reclaim default setting completely (this patch)
> > 2. Only PowerPC and IA64 have default zone_reclaim_mode settings,
> >    other architecture always use zone_reclaim_mode=0.
> 
> Looks like 2 is the inverse of my patch.  That is fine as well.  The only
> reason I formed the patch with the default of 1 and override on x86 is
> it was one less line of change and one less file.

OK. I appreciate we reach good agreement.
I'll try make patch (2) in this week end.

Thanks.

--
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/