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:	Wed, 21 May 2014 19:49:11 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Rientjes <>
To:	Vlastimil Babka <>
cc:	Andrew Morton <>,
	Mel Gorman <>, Rik van Riel <>,
	Joonsoo Kim <>,
	Greg Thelen <>,
	Hugh Dickins <>,,
Subject: Re: [patch -mm] mm, thp: avoid excessive compaction latency during
 fault fix

On Tue, 13 May 2014, Vlastimil Babka wrote:

> I wonder what about a process doing e.g. mmap() with MAP_POPULATE. It seems to
> me that it would get only MIGRATE_ASYNC here, right? Since gfp_mask would
> include __GFP_NO_KSWAPD and it won't have PF_KTHREAD.
> I think that goes against the idea that with MAP_POPULATE you say you are
> willing to wait to have everything in place before you actually use the
> memory. So I guess you are also willing to wait for hugepages in that
> situation?

I don't understand the distinction you're making between MAP_POPULATE and 
simply a prefault of the anon memory.  What is the difference in semantics 
between using MAP_POPULATE and touching a byte every page size along the 
range?  In the latter, you'd be faulting thp with MIGRATE_ASYNC, so I 
don't understand how MAP_POPULATE is any different or implies any 
preference for hugepages.
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