linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 0/2] Delay initializing of large sections of memory

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: <CAE9FiQV+3gEZKPC0sthniGKceSfxV942m+DbyGHa-93Uj6wd1w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 25 Jun 2013 11:38:42 -0700
From:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
To:	Mike Travis <travis@....com>
Cc:	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Nathan Zimmer <nzimmer@....com>,
	Robin Holt <holt@....com>, Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/2] Delay initializing of large sections of memory

On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Mike Travis <travis@....com> wrote:
>
>
> On 6/21/2013 5:23 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 2:30 PM, Mike Travis <travis@....com> wrote:
>>> Exactly.  That's why I left both low and high memory on each node.
>>
>> looks like you assume every node have same ram, and before booting you
>> you need to know memory layout to append the boot command line.
>>
>> We have patchset that moving srat table parse early.
>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/yinghai/linux-yinghai.git
>> for-x86-mm
>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/yinghai/linux-yinghai.git/log/?h=for-x86-mm
>>
>> on top that, we could make your patch pass more simple command like
>> 1/2^n of every node, and only need to pass n instead.
>
> The two params that I couldn't figure out how to provide except via kernel
> param option was the memory block size (128M or 2G) and the physical
> address space per node.  The other 3 params can be automatically
> setup by a script when the total system size is known.  As soon as we
> verify on the 32TB system and surmise what will be needed for 64TB,
> then those 3 params can probably disappear.

our "numa parsing early" patchset could provide "physical address
space per node",
also can calculate memory block size via alignment detection from numa info.

with that, user only can pass "delay_init_mem" only.

Thanks

Yinghai
--
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/