linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] cpusets: randomize node rotor used in cpuset_mem_spread

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: <20110526153319.b7e8c0b6.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Thu, 26 May 2011 15:33:19 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>
Cc:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jack Steiner <steiner@....com>,
	Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@...com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
	Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>, Robin Holt <holt@....com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] cpusets: randomize node rotor used in
 cpuset_mem_spread_node()

On Fri, 15 Apr 2011 10:20:51 +0200
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz> wrote:

> Some workloads that create a large number of small files tend to assign
> too many pages to node 0 (multi-node systems).  Part of the reason is that
> the rotor (in cpuset_mem_spread_node()) used to assign nodes starts at
> node 0 for newly created tasks.
> 
> This patch changes the rotor to be initialized to a random node number of
> the cpuset. We are initializating it lazily in cpuset_mem_spread_node
> resp. cpuset_slab_spread_node.
> 
>
> ...
>
> --- a/kernel/cpuset.c
> +++ b/kernel/cpuset.c
> @@ -2465,11 +2465,19 @@ static int cpuset_spread_node(int *rotor)
>  
>  int cpuset_mem_spread_node(void)
>  {
> +	if (current->cpuset_mem_spread_rotor == -1)
> +		current->cpuset_mem_spread_rotor =
> +			node_random(&current->mems_allowed);
> +
>  	return cpuset_spread_node(&current->cpuset_mem_spread_rotor);
>  }
>  
>  int cpuset_slab_spread_node(void)
>  {
> +	if (current->cpuset_slab_spread_rotor == -1)
> +		current->cpuset_slab_spread_rotor
> +			= node_random(&current->mems_allowed);
> +
>  	return cpuset_spread_node(&current->cpuset_slab_spread_rotor);
>  }
>  

alpha allmodconfig:

kernel/built-in.o: In function `cpuset_slab_spread_node':
(.text+0x67360): undefined reference to `node_random'
kernel/built-in.o: In function `cpuset_slab_spread_node':
(.text+0x67368): undefined reference to `node_random'
kernel/built-in.o: In function `cpuset_mem_spread_node':
(.text+0x673b8): undefined reference to `node_random'
kernel/built-in.o: In function `cpuset_mem_spread_node':
(.text+0x673c0): undefined reference to `node_random'

because it has CONFIG_NUMA=n, CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT=7.

We use "#if MAX_NUMNODES > 1" in nodemask.h, but we use CONFIG_NUMA
when deciding to build mempolicy.o.  That's a bit odd - why didn't
nodemask.h use CONFIG_NUMA?

--
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/