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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 12:04:48 -0700 From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com> To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@....com>, "linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>, Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Stephen Bates <stephen.bates@...rosemi.com>, Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Nicolai Stange <nicstange@...il.com>, Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>, Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/13] mm: sub-section memory hotplug support On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 10:48 AM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> wrote: > Hi, > I didn't get to look through the patch series yet and I might not be > able before LSF/MM. How urgent is this? I am primarily asking because > the memory hotplug is really convoluted right now and putting more on > top doesn't really sound like the thing we really want. I have tried to > simplify the code [1] already but this is an early stage work so I do > not want to impose any burden on you. So I am wondering whether this > is something that needs to be merged very soon or it can wait for the > rework and hopefully end up being much simpler in the end as well. > > What do you think? In general, I think it's better to add new features after reworks/cleanup, but it's not clear to me (yet) that the problem you are trying to solve makes this sub-section enabling for ZONE_DEVICE any simpler. > [1] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170315091347.GA32626@dhcp22.suse.cz ZONE_DEVICE pages are never "online". The patch says "Instead we do page->zone association from move_pfn_range which is called from online_pages." which means the new scheme currently doesn't comprehend the sprinkled ZONE_DEVICE hacks in the memory hotplug code. However, that said, I might take a look at whether the hacks belong in the auto-online code so that we can share the delayed zone initialization, but still skip marking the memory online per the expectations of ZONE_DEVICE. I expect it would be confusing to have memblock devices in sysfs for ranges that can't be marked online? Thoughts?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists