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:	Tue, 5 Feb 2013 16:48:23 +0000
From:	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
To:	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Petr Holasek <pholasek@...hat.com>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	Izik Eidus <izik.eidus@...ellosystems.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/11] ksm: reorganize ksm_check_stable_tree

On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 05:59:35PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> Memory hotremove's ksm_check_stable_tree() is pitifully inefficient
> (restarting whenever it finds a stale node to remove), but rearrange
> so that at least it does not needlessly restart from nid 0 each time.
> And add a couple of comments: here is why we keep pfn instead of page.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
> ---
>  mm/ksm.c |   38 ++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
>  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> 
> --- mmotm.orig/mm/ksm.c	2013-01-25 14:36:52.152205940 -0800
> +++ mmotm/mm/ksm.c	2013-01-25 14:36:53.244205966 -0800
> @@ -1830,31 +1830,36 @@ void ksm_migrate_page(struct page *newpa
>  #endif /* CONFIG_MIGRATION */
>  
>  #ifdef CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTREMOVE
> -static struct stable_node *ksm_check_stable_tree(unsigned long start_pfn,
> -						 unsigned long end_pfn)
> +static void ksm_check_stable_tree(unsigned long start_pfn,
> +				  unsigned long end_pfn)
>  {
> +	struct stable_node *stable_node;
>  	struct rb_node *node;
>  	int nid;
>  
> -	for (nid = 0; nid < nr_node_ids; nid++)
> -		for (node = rb_first(&root_stable_tree[nid]); node;
> -				node = rb_next(node)) {
> -			struct stable_node *stable_node;
> -
> +	for (nid = 0; nid < nr_node_ids; nid++) {
> +		node = rb_first(&root_stable_tree[nid]);
> +		while (node) {

This is not your fault, the old code is wrong too. It is assuming that all
nodes are populated in numeric orders with no holes. It won't work if just
two nodes 0 and 4 are online. It should be using for_each_online_node().

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ