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: Thu, 9 Nov 2017 18:54:57 +0800 From: Yisheng Xie <xieyisheng1@...wei.com> To: Christopher Lameter <cl@...ux.com> CC: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, <mhocko@...e.com>, <mingo@...nel.org>, <rientjes@...gle.com>, <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>, <salls@...ucsb.edu>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <tanxiaojun@...wei.com>, <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 4/4] mm/mempolicy: add nodes_empty check in SYSC_migrate_pages Hi Christopher, On 2017/11/8 23:02, Christopher Lameter wrote: > On Wed, 8 Nov 2017, Yisheng Xie wrote: > >> Another case is current process is *not* the same as target process, and >> when current process try to migrate pages of target process from old_nodes >> to new_nodes, the new_nodes should be a subset of target process cpuset. > > The caller of migrate_pages should be able to migrate the target process > pages anywhere the caller can allocate memory. If that is outside the > target processes cpuset then that is fine. Pagecache pages that are not > allocated by the target process already are not subject to the target > processes restriction. So this is not that unusual. So there is no need to check the restriction of target process cpuset, right? I hope that I do not miss anything :) Thanks Yisheng Xie > > . >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists