linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] vmscan: simplify shrink_inactive

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:	Fri, 16 Apr 2010 09:13:33 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] vmscan: simplify shrink_inactive_list()

On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 09:40:13AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 06:54:16PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > It's a buying-time venture, I'll agree but as both approaches are only
> > > about reducing stack stack they wouldn't be long-term solutions by your
> > > criteria. What do you suggest?
> > 
> > (from easy to more complicated):
> > 
> > - Disable direct reclaim with 4K stacks
> 
> Just to re-iterate: we're blowing the stack with direct reclaim on
> x86_64  w/ 8k stacks.  The old i386/4k stack problem is a red
> herring.

Yes that's known, but on 4K it will definitely not work at all.

-Andi
-- 
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
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/