linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] vmpressure: implement strict mode

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:	Wed, 26 Jun 2013 16:50:51 +0900
From:	Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
To:	Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mhocko@...e.cz,
	anton@...msg.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vmpressure: implement strict mode

On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 05:51:29PM -0400, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> Currently, applications are notified for the level they registered for
> _plus_ higher levels.
> 
> This is a problem if the application wants to implement different
> actions for different levels. For example, an application might want
> to release 10% of its cache on level low, 50% on medium and 100% on
> critical. To do this, the application has to register a different fd
> for each event. However, fd low is always going to be notified and
> and all fds are going to be notified on level critical.
> 
> Strict mode solves this problem by strictly notifiying the event
> an fd has registered for. It's optional. By default we still notify
> on higher levels.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@...hat.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>

Shouldn't we make this default?
What do you think about it?

-- 
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim
--
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/