linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 0/8] Define coherent device memory node

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <580E4D2D.2070408@intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 24 Oct 2016 11:04:29 -0700
From:   Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To:     Anshuman Khandual <khandual@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Cc:     mhocko@...e.com, js1304@...il.com, vbabka@...e.cz, mgorman@...e.de,
        minchan@...nel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, bsingharora@...il.com
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/8] Define coherent device memory node

On 10/23/2016 09:31 PM, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> 	To achieve seamless integration  between system RAM and coherent
> device memory it must be able to utilize core memory kernel features like
> anon mapping, file mapping, page cache, driver managed pages, HW poisoning,
> migrations, reclaim, compaction, etc.

So, you need to support all these things, but not autonuma or hugetlbfs?
 What's the reasoning behind that?

If you *really* don't want a "cdm" page to be migrated, then why isn't
that policy set on the VMA in the first place?  That would keep "cdm"
pages from being made non-cdm.  And, why would autonuma ever make a
non-cdm page and migrate it in to cdm?  There will be no NUMA access
faults caused by the devices that are fed to autonuma.

I'm confused.