linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 8/8] prepare to remove /proc/sys/vm/hugepages_treat_as

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: <87vc3qvtmc.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Thu, 01 Aug 2013 11:29:39 +0530
From:	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Hillf Danton <dhillf@...il.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Wanpeng Li <liwanp@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Naoya Horiguchi <nao.horiguchi@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] prepare to remove /proc/sys/vm/hugepages_treat_as_movable

Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com> writes:

> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 12:02:30AM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
>> Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com> writes:
>> 
>> > Now hugepages are definitely movable. So allocating hugepages from
>> > ZONE_MOVABLE is natural and we have no reason to keep this parameter.
>> > In order to allow userspace to prepare for the removal, let's leave
>> > this sysctl handler as noop for a while.
>> 
>> I guess you still need to handle architectures for which pmd_huge is
>> 
>> int pmd_huge(pmd_t pmd)
>> {
>> 	return 0;
>> }
>> 
>> embedded powerpc is one. They don't store pte information at the PMD
>> level. Instead pmd contains a pointer to hugepage directory which
>> contain huge pte.
>
> It seems that this comment is for the whole series, not just for this
> patch, right?
>
> Some users of hugepage migration (mbind, move_pages, migrate_pages)
> walk over page tables to collect hugepages to be migrated, where
> hugepages are just ignored in such architectures due to pmd_huge.
> So no problem for these users.
>
> But the other users (softoffline, memory hotremove) choose hugepages
> to be migrated based on pfn, where they don't check pmd_huge.
> As you wrote, this can be problematic for such architectures.
> So I think of adding pmd_huge() check somewhere (in unmap_and_move_huge_page
> for example) to make it fail for such architectures.

Considering that we have architectures that won't support migrating
explicit hugepages with this patch series, is it ok to use
GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE for hugepage allocation ?

-aneesh

--
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/