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  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:	Sat, 4 Jan 2014 07:31:43 +0000
From:	Minchan Kim <>
To:	Laura Abbott <>
Cc:	Dave Hansen <>,
	Andrew Morton <>,
	Kyungmin Park <>,,
	Russell King <>,
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCHv3 00/11] Intermix Lowmem and vmalloc


On Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 02:08:52PM -0800, Laura Abbott wrote:
> On 1/3/2014 10:23 AM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> >On 01/02/2014 01:53 PM, Laura Abbott wrote:
> >>The goal here is to allow as much lowmem to be mapped as if the block of memory
> >>was not reserved from the physical lowmem region. Previously, we had been
> >>hacking up the direct virt <-> phys translation to ignore a large region of
> >>memory. This did not scale for multiple holes of memory however.
> >
> >How much lowmem do these holes end up eating up in practice, ballpark?
> >I'm curious how painful this is going to get.
> >
> In total, the worst case can be close to 100M with an average case
> around 70M-80M. The split and number of holes vary with the layout
> but end up with 60M-80M one hole and the rest in the other.

One more thing I'd like to know is how bad direct virt <->phys tranlsation
in scale POV and how often virt<->phys tranlsation is called in your worload
so what's the gain from this patch?


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists