linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] Tight check of pfn

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: <20100713164423.GC2815@barrios-desktop>
Date:	Wed, 14 Jul 2010 01:44:23 +0900
From:	Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>
To:	Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, linux@....linux.org.uk,
	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>,
	Yakui Zhao <yakui.zhao@...el.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, kgene.kim@...sung.com,
	Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Tight check of pfn_valid on sparsemem

Hi, Dave. 

On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 09:35:33AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-07-14 at 00:43 +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > 3 is not a big deal than 2 about memory usage.
> > If the system use memory space fully(MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS 31), it just consumes
> > 1024(128 * 8) byte. So now I think best solution is 2. 
> > 
> > Russell. What do you think about it? 
> 
> I'm not Russell, but I'll tell you what I think. :)
> 

No problem. :)

> Make the sections 16MB.  You suggestion to add the start/end pfns

I hope so. 

> _doubles_ the size of the structure, and its size overhead.  We have
> systems with a pretty tremendous amount of memory with 16MB sections.

Yes. it does in several GB server system.

> 
> If you _really_ can't make the section size smaller, and the vast
> majority of the sections are fully populated, you could hack something
> in.  We could, for instance, have a global list that's mostly readonly
> which tells you which sections need to be have their sizes closely
> inspected.  That would work OK if, for instance, you only needed to
> check a couple of memory sections in the system.  It'll start to suck if
> you made the lists very long.

Thanks for advise. As I say, I hope Russell accept 16M section. 

> 
> -- Dave
> 

-- 
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim
--
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/