linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 0/7] Introduce ZONE

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:   Thu, 11 May 2017 10:51:17 +0200
From:   Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc:     Joonsoo Kim <js1304@...il.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        mgorman@...hsingularity.net, Laura Abbott <lauraa@...eaurora.org>,
        Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
        Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
        Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@...a86.com>,
        "Aneesh Kumar K . V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@....com,
        Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
        Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 0/7] Introduce ZONE_CMA

On 05/04/2017 02:46 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 04-05-17 14:33:24, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>>>
>>> I am pretty sure s390 and ppc support NUMA and aim at supporting really
>>> large systems. 
>>
>> I don't see ppc there,
> 
> config KVM_BOOK3S_64_HV
>         tristate "KVM for POWER7 and later using hypervisor mode in host"
>         depends on KVM_BOOK3S_64 && PPC_POWERNV
>         select KVM_BOOK3S_HV_POSSIBLE
>         select MMU_NOTIFIER
>         select CMA
> 
> fa61a4e376d21 tries to explain some more

Uh, that's unfortunate then.

> [...]
>>> Are we really ready to add another thing like that? How are distribution
>>> kernels going to handle that?
>>
>> I still hope that generic enterprise/desktop distributions can disable
>> it, and it's only used for small devices with custom kernels.
>>
>> The config burden is already there in any case, it just translates to
>> extra migratetype and fastpath hooks, not extra zone and potentially
>> less nodes.
> 
> AFAIU the extra migrate type costs nothing when there are no cma
> reservations. And those hooks can be made noop behind static branch
> as well. So distribution kernels do not really have to be afraid of
> enabling CMA currently.

The tradeoff is unfortunate :/