linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: page allocator: Adjust the per-cpu counter threshold when memory is low

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, 23 Dec 2010 15:07:02 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
cc:	Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
	Kyle McMartin <kyle@...artin.ca>,
	Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: page allocator: Adjust the per-cpu counter
 threshold when memory is low

On Thu, 23 Dec 2010, Andrew Morton wrote:

> > We had to pull aa454840 "mm: page allocator: calculate a better estimate 
> > of NR_FREE_PAGES when memory is low and kswapd is awake" from 2.6.36 
> > internally because tests showed that it would cause the machine to stall 
> > as the result of heavy kswapd activity.  I merged it back with this fix as 
> > it is pending in the -mm tree and it solves the issue we were seeing, so I 
> > definitely think this should be pushed to -stable (and I would seriously 
> > consider it for 2.6.37 inclusion even at this late date).
> 
> How's about I send
> mm-page-allocator-adjust-the-per-cpu-counter-threshold-when-memory-is-low.patch
> in for 2.6.38 and tag it for backporting into 2.6.37.1 and 2.6.36.x? 
> That way it'll get a bit of 2.6.38-rc testing before being merged into
> 2.6.37.x.
> 

I don't think anyone would be able to answer that judgment call other than 
you or Linus, it's a trade-off on whether 2.6.37 should be released with 
the knowledge that it regresses just like 2.6.36 does (rendering both 
unusable on some of our machines out of the box) because we're late in the 
cycle.

I personally think the testing is already sufficient since it's been 
sitting in -mm for two months, it's been suggested as stable material by a 
couple different parties, it was a prerequisite for the transparent 
hugepage series, and we've tested and merged it as fixing the regression 
in 2.6.36 (as Fedora has, as far as I know).  We've already merged the fix 
internally, though, so it's not for selfish reasons :)
--
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/