linux-kernel - Re: dm bufio: Reduce dm_bufio

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

Message-ID: <20180904174543.GQ14951@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date:   Tue, 4 Sep 2018 19:45:43 +0200
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:     Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>
Cc:     Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>,
        jing xia <jing.xia.mail@...il.com>, agk@...hat.com,
        dm-devel@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: dm bufio: Reduce dm_bufio_lock contention

On Tue 04-09-18 13:30:44, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> 
> 
> On Tue, 4 Sep 2018, Michal Hocko wrote:
> 
> > Regarding other other workloads. AFAIR the problem was due to the
> > wait_iff_congested in the direct reclaim. And I've been arguing that
> > special casing __GFP_NORETRY is not a propoer way to handle that case.
> > We have PF_LESS_THROTTLE to handle cases where the caller cannot be
> > really throttled because it is a part of the congestion control. I dunno
> > what happened in that regards since then though.
> > -- 
> > Michal Hocko
> > SUSE Labs
> 
> So, could you take this patch https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10505523/ 
> and commit it to the kernel?
> 
> You agreed with that patch, but you didn't commit it.

Because I do not maintain any tree that Linus pulls from. You need to
involve Andrew Morton to get this to the mm tree and then to Linus.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs