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:   Thu, 23 Feb 2017 14:03:13 -0500
From:   Johannes Weiner <>
To:     Michal Hocko <>
Cc:     Laurent Dufour <>,
        Vladimir Davydov <>,
        Balbir Singh <>,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] mm/cgroup: delay soft limit data allocation

On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 04:31:07PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 23-02-17 14:36:39, Laurent Dufour wrote:
> > Until a soft limit is set to a cgroup, the soft limit data are useless
> > so delay this allocation when a limit is set.
> Hmm, I am still undecided whether this is actually worth it. On one hand
> distribution kernels tend to have quite large NUMA_SHIFT (e.g. SLES has
> NUMA_SHIFT=10 and then we will save 8kB+12kB which is not hell of a lot
> but always good if we can save that, especially for a rarely used
> feature. The code grown on the other hand (it was in __init section
> previously) which is a minus, on the other hand.
> What do you think Johannes?

Hohumm, saving 5 pages on a NUMA machine vs. the additional complexity
and the increased risk of memory problems when somebody sets up a soft
limit after some uptime... I don't think I can give a strong yes or no
on this one, so inertia wins for me; I'd just leave it alone.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists