linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/6] count transparent hugepage splits

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: <1296854905.6737.2631.camel@nimitz>
Date:	Fri, 04 Feb 2011 13:28:25 -0800
From:	Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
Cc:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, Michael J Wolf <mjwolf@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/6] count transparent hugepage splits

On Fri, 2011-02-04 at 22:18 +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 01:22:14PM -0800, David Rientjes wrote:
> > i.e. no global locking, but we've accepted the occassional off-by-one 
> > error (even though splitting of hugepages isn't by any means lightning 
> > fast and the overhead of atomic ops would be negligible).
> 
> Agreed losing an increment is not a problem, but in very large systems
> it will become a bottleneck. It's not super urgent, but I think it
> needs to become a per-cpu counter sooner than later (not needed
> immediately but I would appreciate an incremental patch soon to
> address that). 

Seems like something that would be fairly trivial with the existing
count_vm_event() infrastructure.  Any reason not to use that?  I'll be
happy to tack a patch on to my series.

-- Dave

--
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/