linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4]: affinity-on-next-touch

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: <4A3C8EAE.3030007@inria.fr>
Date:	Sat, 20 Jun 2009 09:24:30 +0200
From:	Brice Goglin <Brice.Goglin@...ia.fr>
To:	Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>
CC:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Stefan Lankes <lankes@...s.rwth-aachen.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-numa@...r.kernel.org,
	Boris Bierbaum <boris@...s.rwth-aachen.de>,
	'Brice Goglin' <Brice.Goglin@...ia.fr>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4]: affinity-on-next-touch

Lee Schermerhorn wrote:
> My patches don't have per process enablement.  Rather, I chose to use
> per cpuset enablement.  I view cpusets as sort of "numa control groups"
> and thought this was an appropriate level at which to control this sort
> of behavior--analogous to memory_spread_{page|slab}.  That probably
> needs to be discussed more widely, tho'.
>   

Could you explain why you actually want to enable/disable
migrate-on-fault on a cpuset (or process) basis? Why would an
administrator want to disable it? Aren't the existing cpuset memory
restriction abilities enough?

Brice

--
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/