linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 2/4] mm/__free_one_page: skip merge for order-0 page unless compaction failed

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20180321074249.GA1855@aaronlu>
Date:   Wed, 21 Mar 2018 15:42:49 +0800
From:   Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@...el.com>
To:     "Figo.zhang" <figo1802@...il.com>
Cc:     Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Kemi Wang <kemi.wang@...el.com>,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 2/4] mm/__free_one_page: skip merge for order-0
 page unless compaction failed

On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 10:59:16PM -0700, Figo.zhang wrote:
> 2018-03-20 21:53 GMT-07:00 Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@...el.com>:
> 
> > On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 09:21:33PM -0700, Figo.zhang wrote:
> > > suppose that in free_one_page() will try to merge to high order anytime ,
> > > but now in your patch,
> > > those merge has postponed when system in low memory status, it is very
> > easy
> > > let system trigger
> > > low memory state and get poor performance.
> >
> > Merge or not merge, the size of free memory is not affected.
> >
> 
> yes, the total free memory is not impact, but will influence the higher
> order allocation.

Yes, that's correct.