linux-kernel - Re: [patch 0/9] mm: thrash detection-based file cache sizing v6

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: <20131125165729.3ad409506fb6db058d88c258@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Mon, 25 Nov 2013 16:57:29 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Cc:	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>,
	Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>,
	Seth Jennings <sjenning@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Roman Gushchin <klamm@...dex-team.ru>,
	Ozgun Erdogan <ozgun@...usdata.com>,
	Metin Doslu <metin@...usdata.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 0/9] mm: thrash detection-based file cache sizing v6

On Sun, 24 Nov 2013 18:38:19 -0500 Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org> wrote:

> This series solves the problem by maintaining a history of pages
> evicted from the inactive list, enabling the VM to detect frequently
> used pages regardless of inactive list size and facilitate working set
> transitions.

It's a very readable patchset - thanks for taking the time to do that.

> 31 files changed, 1253 insertions(+), 401 deletions(-)

It's also a *ton* of stuff.  More code complexity, larger kernel data
structures.  All to address a quite narrow class of workloads on a
relatively small window of machine sizes.  How on earth do we decide
whether it's worth doing?

Also, what's the memcg angle?  This is presently a global thing - do
you think we're likely to want to make it per-memcg in the future?

--
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/