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: <5444B3DC.90709@numascale.com>
Date:	Mon, 20 Oct 2014 15:03:56 +0800
From:	Daniel J Blueman <daniel@...ascale.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
CC:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
	Steffen Persvold <sp@...ascale.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] Numachip: use 2GB memory block size

On 19/10/2014 17:23, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Daniel J Blueman <daniel@...ascale.com> wrote:
>
>> Use appropriate memory block size to reduce sysfs entry creation time
>> by 16x.
>>
>> Boot-tested with the four permutations of X86_UV and X86_NUMACHIP.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Daniel J Blueman <daniel@...ascale.com>
>> ---
>>   arch/x86/mm/init_64.c | 7 ++++---
>>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/init_64.c b/arch/x86/mm/init_64.c
>> index 5621c47..22ea6de 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/mm/init_64.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/init_64.c
>> @@ -53,6 +53,7 @@
>>   #include <asm/cacheflush.h>
>>   #include <asm/init.h>
>>   #include <asm/uv/uv.h>
>> +#include <asm/numachip/numachip.h>
>>   #include <asm/setup.h>
>>
>>   #include "mm_internal.h"
>> @@ -1235,9 +1236,9 @@ static unsigned long probe_memory_block_size(void)
>>   	/* start from 2g */
>>   	unsigned long bz = 1UL<<31;
>>
>> -#ifdef CONFIG_X86_UV
>> -	if (is_uv_system()) {
>> -		printk(KERN_INFO "UV: memory block size 2GB\n");
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
>> +	if (is_uv_system() || is_numachip_system()) {
>> +		pr_info("Memory block size 2GB for large-SMP system\n");
>>   		return 2UL * 1024 * 1024 * 1024;
>
> It would be a lot cleaner and more robust to have a more
> intelligent decision here.
>
> Is there a reliable indicator for large 'sysfs entry creation
> time', such as a lot of RAM present?

Yes, agreed exactly.

> Also, it would be nice to list the pros/cons of this change, an
> advantage is reduced overhead - what are the disadvantages?

The single disadvantage is that small-memory systems won't be able to 
have finer control of memory offlining, though the impact of that depend 
on why the user is offlining memory of course.

If it seems reasonable for x86-64 systems with >64GB memory to have 2GB 
memory block sizes, I could prepare that change instead and document the 
above if preferred?

Thanks,
   Daniel
-- 
Daniel J Blueman
Principal Software Engineer, Numascale
--
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