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  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:	Thu, 19 Mar 2015 11:09:15 -0700
From:	Linus Torvalds <>
To:	Mel Gorman <>
Cc:	Dave Chinner <>, Ingo Molnar <>,
	Andrew Morton <>,
	Aneesh Kumar <>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <>,
	Linux-MM <>,,
	ppc-dev <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] mm: numa: Slow PTE scan rate if migration failures occur

On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 7:10 AM, Mel Gorman <> wrote:
> -       if (!pmd_dirty(pmd))
> +       /* See similar comment in do_numa_page for explanation */
> +       if (!(vma->vm_flags & VM_WRITE))

Yeah, that would certainly be a whole lot more obvious than all the
"if this particular pte/pmd looks like X" tests.

So that, together with scanning rate improvements (this *does* seem to
be somewhat chaotic, so it's quite possible that the current scanning
rate thing is just fairly unstable) is likely the right thing. I'd
just like to _understand_ why that write/dirty bit makes such a
difference. I thought I understood what was going on, and was happy,
and then Dave come with his crazy numbers.

Damn you Dave, and damn your numbers and "facts" and stuff. Sometimes
I much prefer ignorant bliss.

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