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: <20140402060601.GA31305@kernel.org>
Date:	Wed, 2 Apr 2014 14:06:01 +0800
From:	Shaohua Li <shli@...nel.org>
To:	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86,mm: delay TLB flush after clearing accessed bit

On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 02:31:31PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On 04/01/2014 12:21 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 9:11 AM, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Memory pressure is not necessarily caused by the same process
> >> whose accessed bit we just cleared. Memory pressure may not
> >> even be caused by any process's virtual memory at all, but it
> >> could be caused by the page cache.
> > 
> > If we have that much memory pressure on the page cache without having
> > any memory pressure on the actual VM space, then the swap-out activity
> > will never be an issue anyway.
> > 
> > IOW, I think all these scenarios are made-up. I'd much rather go for
> > simpler implementation, and make things more complex only in the
> > presence of numbers. Of which we have none.
> 
> We've been bitten by the lack of a properly tracked accessed
> bit before, but admittedly that was with the KVM code and EPT.
> 
> I'll add my Acked-by: to Shaohua's original patch then, and
> will keep my eyes open for any problems that may or may not
> materialize...
> 
> Shaohua?

I'd agree to choose the simple implementation at current stage and check if
there are problems really.

Andrew,
can you please pick up my orginal patch "x86: clearing access bit don't
flush tlb" (with Rik's Ack)? Or I can resend it if you preferred.

Thanks,
Shaohua
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ