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
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Fri, 27 Apr 2018 11:57:08 -0700
From:   Matthew Wilcox <>
To:     David Rientjes <>
Cc:     Vlastimil Babka <>, Michal Hocko <>,
        Roman Gushchin <>,,,,, Andrew Morton <>,
        Alexander Viro <>,
        Johannes Weiner <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: don't show nr_indirectly_reclaimable in /proc/vmstat

On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 11:41:31AM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Apr 2018, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> > It was in the original thread, see e.g.
> > <>
> > 
> > However it will take some time to get that in mainline, and meanwhile
> > the current implementation does prevent a DOS. So I doubt it can be
> > fully reverted - as a compromise I just didn't want the counter to
> > become ABI. TBH though, other people at LSF/MM didn't seem concerned
> > that /proc/vmstat is an ABI that we can't change (i.e. counters have
> > been presumably removed in the past already).
> > 
> What prevents this from being a simple atomic_t that gets added to in 
> __d_alloc(), subtracted from in __d_free_external_name(), and read in 
> si_mem_available() and __vm_enough_memory()?

I'd think you'd want one atomic_t per NUMA node at least ...

Powered by blists - more mailing lists