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:   Tue, 29 Aug 2017 11:16:18 +0200
From:   Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To:     js1304@...il.com, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     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,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mm/cma: manage the memory of the CMA area by using
 the ZONE_MOVABLE

On 08/24/2017 08:36 AM, js1304@...il.com wrote:
> From: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>
> 
> 0. History
> 
> This patchset is the follow-up of the discussion about the
> "Introduce ZONE_CMA (v7)" [1]. Please reference it if more information
> is needed.
> 

[...]

> 
> [1]: lkml.kernel.org/r/1491880640-9944-1-git-send-email-iamjoonsoo.kim@....com
> [2]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/10/15/623
> [3]: http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-mm/msg100562.html
> 
> Reviewed-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>

The previous version has introduced ZONE_CMA, so I would think switching
to ZONE_MOVABLE is enough to drop previous reviews. Perhaps most of the
code involved is basically the same, though?

Anyway I checked the current patch and did some basic tests with qemu,
so you can keep my ack.

BTW, if we dropped NR_FREE_CMA_PAGES, could we also drop MIGRATE_CMA and
related hooks? Is that counter really that useful as it works right now?
It will decrease both by CMA allocations (which has to be explicitly
freed) and by movable allocations (which can be migrated). What if only
CMA alloc/release touched it?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ