linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Make swap accounting default behavior configurable v4

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:	Thu, 18 Nov 2010 11:23:49 +0100
From:	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>
To:	Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make swap accounting default behavior configurable v4

[I am removing stable from CC - to shield them off the discussion]

On Thu 18-11-10 19:14:27, Daisuke Nishimura wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 10:56:07 +0100
> Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu 18-11-10 17:53:34, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> > > On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 17:46:54 +0900
> > > Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 09:23:32 +0100
> > > > Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > On Wed 17-11-10 12:28:01, Daisuke Nishimura wrote:
> > > > > > On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 17:12:25 -0800
> > > > > > Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > [...]
> > > > > > > Yes, we're stuck with the old one now.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > But we should note that "foo=[0|1]" is superior to "foo" and "nofoo". 
> > > > > > > Even if we didn't initially intend to add "nofoo".
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > I see.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Michal-san, could you update your patch to use "swapaccount=[1|0]" ?
> > > > > 
> > > > > I have noticed that Andrew has already taken the last version of the
> > > > > patch for -mm tree. Should I still rework it to change swapaccount to
> > > > > swapaccount=0|1 resp. true|false?
> > > > > 
> > > > It's usual to update a patch into more sophisticated one while it is in -mm tree.
> > > > So, I think you'd better to do it(btw, I prefer 0|1 to true|false.
> > > > Reading kernel-parameters.txt, 0|1 is more commonly used.).
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > I vote for 0|1
> > 
> > Changes since v3:
> > * add 0|1 parameter values handling
> > 
> > Changes since v2:
> > * put the new parameter description to the proper (alphabetically
> > * sorted)
> >   place in Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
> >   
> > Changes since v1:
> > * do not remove noswapaccount parameter and add swapaccount parameter
> > * instead
> > * Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt updated)
> > 
> 
> I'm sorry again and again, but I think removing "noswapaccount" completely
> would be better, as Andrew said first:

I read the above Andrew's statement that we really should stick with the
old parameter.

> > So we have swapaccount and noswapaccount.  Ho hum, "swapaccount=[1|0]"
> > would have been better.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Daisuke Nishimura.

-- 
Michal Hocko
L3 team 
SUSE LINUX s.r.o.
Lihovarska 1060/12
190 00 Praha 9    
Czech Republic
--
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/