linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ksm: Expose configuration via sysctl

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:	Tue, 25 Feb 2014 17:05:34 -0800 (PST)
From:	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
To:	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
cc:	Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	Izik Eidus <izik.eidus@...ellosystems.com>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	Kay Sievers <kay@...y.org>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ksm: Expose configuration via sysctl

On Tue, 25 Feb 2014, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 12:28:04AM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote:
> > Configuration of tunables and Linux virtual memory settings has traditionally
> > happened via sysctl. Thanks to that there are well established ways to make
> > sysctl configuration bits persistent (sysctl.conf).
> > 
> > KSM introduced a sysfs based configuration path which is not covered by user
> > space persistent configuration frameworks.
> > 
> > In order to make life easy for sysadmins, this patch adds all access to all
> > KSM tunables via sysctl as well. That way sysctl.conf works for KSM as well,
> > giving us a streamlined way to make KSM configuration persistent.
> 
> ksm can be a module, so this won't work.

That's news to me.  Are you writing of some Red Hat patches, or just
misled by the "module_init(ksm_init)" which used the last line of ksm.c?

I don't mind Alex's patch, but I do think the same should be done for
THP as for KSM, and a general solution more attractive than more #ifdefs
one by one.  Should a general solution just be in userspace, in sysctl(8)?

Hugh
--
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/