linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/7] Allow sysfs memory directories to be split

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:	Wed, 14 Jul 2010 12:16:53 -0500
From:	Nathan Fontenot <nfont@...tin.ibm.com>
To:	Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC:	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] Allow sysfs memory directories to be split

On 07/13/2010 10:26 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-07-14 at 09:35 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
>>   2. I'd like to write a configfs module for handling memory hotplug even when
>>      sysfs directroy is not created.
>>      Because configfs support rmdir/mkdir, the user (ppc's daemon?) has to do
>>      
>>      When offlining section X.
>>      # insmod configfs_memory.ko
>>      # mount -t configfs none /configfs
>>      # mkdir /configfs/memoryX
>>      # echo offline > /configfs/memoryX/state
>>      # rmdir /configfs/memoryX
>>
>>   And making this operation as the default bahavior for all arch's memory hotplug may
>>   be better...
>>
>> Dave, how do you think ? Because ppc guys uses "probe" interface already,
>> this can be handled... no ?
> 
> I think creating a interface to duplicate the existing sysfs one is a
> bad idea.  I also think removing the existing sysfs one isn't feasible
> since there are users, and it's truly part of the ABI.  So, I'm not
> really a fan on the configfs interface. :(
> 
> I really do think the sysfs interface is fixable.  We should at least
> give it a good shot before largely duplicating its functionality.

I agree with Dave, I don't think another memory hotplug interface is needed.

I am working to update the patchset to remove the split functionality and
fix other items commented on.  this new patch will just split the memory_block
structure so that a memory_block can span multiple memory sections.

Kame, I understand that offlining 16 MB is easier than 256 MB.  From the ppc
perspective though, we are still offlining 256 MB.  We do memory add/remove
on LMB size chunks, so we have to add/remove all of the memory sections contained
in an LMB.  If any one memory section covered by a LMB fails to add/remove, we
restore the memory sections to their orignal state an fail the add/remove operation.
NOTE: the code doing this is not in the kernel, but in the user-space drmgr
command (from powerpc-utils package).

-Nathan 

--
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/