linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] slub, hotplug: ignore unrelated node's hot-adding and hot-removing

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: <0000013a09dec004-497e7afa-8c0f-46ff-bf8e-056f7df1ed0b-000000@email.amazonses.com>
Date:	Thu, 27 Sep 2012 22:35:25 +0000
From:	Christoph <cl@...ux.com>
To:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com>
Cc:	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
	Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	"kosaki.motohiro@...il.com" <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] slub, hotplug: ignore unrelated node's hot-adding and hot-removing

While you are at it: Could you move the code into slab_common.c so that there is only one version to maintain?

On Sep 27, 2012, at 17:04, KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com> wrote:

> (9/27/12 2:47 AM), Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>> SLUB only fucus on the nodes which has normal memory, so ignore the other
>> node's hot-adding and hot-removing.
>> 
>> Aka: if some memroy of a node(which has no onlined memory) is online,
>> but this new memory onlined is not normal memory(HIGH memory example),
>> we should not allocate kmem_cache_node for SLUB.
>> 
>> And if the last normal memory is offlined, but the node still has memroy,
>> we should remove kmem_cache_node for that node.(current code delay it when
>> all of the memory is offlined)
>> 
>> so we only do something when marg->status_change_nid_normal > 0.
>> marg->status_change_nid is not suitable here.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>
>> ---
>> mm/slub.c |    4 ++--
>> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c
>> index 2fdd96f..2d78639 100644
>> --- a/mm/slub.c
>> +++ b/mm/slub.c
>> @@ -3577,7 +3577,7 @@ static void slab_mem_offline_callback(void *arg)
>>    struct memory_notify *marg = arg;
>>    int offline_node;
>> 
>> -    offline_node = marg->status_change_nid;
>> +    offline_node = marg->status_change_nid_normal;
>> 
>>    /*
>>     * If the node still has available memory. we need kmem_cache_node
>> @@ -3610,7 +3610,7 @@ static int slab_mem_going_online_callback(void *arg)
>>    struct kmem_cache_node *n;
>>    struct kmem_cache *s;
>>    struct memory_notify *marg = arg;
>> -    int nid = marg->status_change_nid;
>> +    int nid = marg->status_change_nid_normal;
>>    int ret = 0;
> 
> Looks reasonable. I think slab need similar fix too.
> 
> 
> 
--
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/