linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] KSM: numa awareness sysfs knob

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:	Fri, 29 Jun 2012 18:47:06 +0200
From:	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
To:	Petr Holasek <pholasek@...hat.com>
Cc:	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
	Izik Eidus <izik.eidus@...ellosystems.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, Anton Arapov <anton@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] KSM: numa awareness sysfs knob

On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 06:30:33PM +0200, Petr Holasek wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jun 2012, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 01:49:52PM +0200, Petr Holasek wrote:
> > > Introduces new sysfs boolean knob /sys/kernel/mm/ksm/merge_nodes
> > > which control merging pages across different numa nodes.
> > > When it is set to zero only pages from the same node are merged,
> > > otherwise pages from all nodes can be merged together (default behavior).
> > 
> > Is it conceivable that admins may (in the future) want to merge only
> > across nodes that are below a given distance threshold?
> > 
> > I'm not asking to implement this, just whether the knob can be
> > introduced such that it's future-compatible.  Make it default to a
> > Very High Number and only allow setting it to 0 for now e.g.?  And
> > name it max_node_merge_distance (I'm bad at names)?
> > 
> > What do you think?
> 
> I started with exactly same idea as you described above in the first
> RFC, link: https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/11/30/91
> But this approach turned out to be more complicated than it looked
> (see two last emails in thread) and complexity of solution would rise
> a lot.

Oh, I should have checked the archives given that it's v2.  I expected
it to get complex but didn't put enough thought into it to see /that/
amount of complexity.  Sorry.

Carry on, then :-)
--
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/