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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20151015035317.GF1735@swordfish> Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 12:53:17 +0900 From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com> To: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org> Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] zsmalloc: don't test shrinker_enabled in zs_shrinker_count() On (10/15/15 11:29), Minchan Kim wrote: [..] > I'm in favor of removing shrinker disable feature with this patch( > although we didn't implement it yet) because if there is some problem > of compaction, we should reveal and fix it without hiding with the > feature. > sure. > One thing I want is if we decide it, let's remove all things > about shrinker_enabled(ie, variable). > If we might need it later, we could introduce it easily. well, do we really want to make the shrinker a vital part of zsmalloc? it's not that we will tighten the dependency between zsmalloc and shrinker, we will introduce it instead. in a sense that, at the moment, zsmalloc is, let's say, ignorant to shrinker registration errors (shrinker registration implementation is internal to shrinker), because there is no direct impact on zsmalloc functionality -- zsmalloc will not be able to release some pages (there are if-s here: first, zsmalloc shrinker callback may even not be called; second, zsmalloc may not be albe to migrate objects and release objects). no really strong opinion against, but at the same time zsmalloc will have another point of failure (again, zsmalloc should not be aware of shrinker registration implementation and why it may fail). so... I can prepare a new patch later today. -ss > > > > > Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com> > > --- > > mm/zsmalloc.c | 3 --- > > 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/mm/zsmalloc.c b/mm/zsmalloc.c > > index 7ad5e54..8ba247d 100644 > > --- a/mm/zsmalloc.c > > +++ b/mm/zsmalloc.c > > @@ -1822,9 +1822,6 @@ static unsigned long zs_shrinker_count(struct shrinker *shrinker, > > struct zs_pool *pool = container_of(shrinker, struct zs_pool, > > shrinker); > > > > - if (!pool->shrinker_enabled) > > - return 0; > > - > > for (i = zs_size_classes - 1; i >= 0; i--) { > > class = pool->size_class[i]; > > if (!class) > > -- > > 2.6.1.134.g4b1fd35 > > > -- 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