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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 07:50:06 +0200 From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> To: kemi <kemi.wang@...el.com> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, "Luis R . Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>, Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, Christopher Lameter <cl@...ux.com>, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@...baba-inc.com>, Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...el.com>, Andi Kleen <andi.kleen@...el.com>, Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>, Ying Huang <ying.huang@...el.com>, Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@...el.com>, Proc sysctl <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mm, sysctl: make VM stats configurable On Mon 18-09-17 10:44:52, kemi wrote: > > > On 2017年09月15日 22:28, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Fri 15-09-17 07:16:23, Dave Hansen wrote: > >> On 09/15/2017 04:49 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: > >>> Why do we need an auto-mode? Is it safe to enforce by default. > >> > >> Do we *need* it? Not really. > >> > >> But, it does offer the best of both worlds: The vast majority of users > >> see virtually no impact from the counters. The minority that do need > >> them pay the cost *and* don't have to change their tooling at all. > > > > Just to make it clear, I am not really opposing. It just adds some code > > which we can safe... It is also rather chatty for something that can be > > true/false. > > > > It has benefit, as Dave mentioned above. > Actually, it adds some coding complexity to provide a tuning interface with > on/off/auto mode. Using human-readable string instead of magic number makes > it easier to use, people probably don't need to review the ABI doc again > before using it. So, I don't think that should be a problem Is this a thing that would be changed very often. I suspect that once needed it will be set in a startup sysctl configuration and there will be no further need to touch it again. > >>> Is it> possible that userspace can get confused to see 0 NUMA stats in > >> the > >>> first read while other allocation stats are non-zero? > >> > >> I doubt it. Those counters are pretty worthless by themselves. I have > >> tooling that goes and reads them, but it aways displays deltas. Read > >> stats, sleep one second, read again, print the difference. > > > > This is how I use them as well. > > > >> The only scenario I can see mattering is someone who is seeing a > >> performance issue due to NUMA allocation misses (or whatever) and wants > >> to go look *back* in the past. > > > > yes > > > > If it really matters, setting vmstat_mode=strict as a default option is a simple > way to fix it. What's your idea? thanks Well, we are usually very conservative when changing the default behavior. The primary reason why I was asking is that the auto mode doesn't make much sense unless it is the default. I fully realize that such an hypothetical breakage is really hard to envision but considering it is more code to allow auto mode than a simple on/off (we have parsing helpers for that AFAIR) then I would rather go with the simpler option. This is up to you of course. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists