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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4b9e30ea-aa8e-cfd7-230b-1d5b0a8837f4@arm.com>
Date:   Mon, 26 Nov 2018 21:22:13 +0530
From:   Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>
To:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
Cc:     Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] ACPI HMAT memory sysfs representation



On 11/24/2018 02:43 AM, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 11:21 AM Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 11/22/18 10:42 PM, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>>> Are we willing to go in the direction for inclusion of a new system
>>> call, subset of it appears on sysfs etc ? My primary concern is not
>>> how the attribute information appears on the sysfs but lack of it's
>>> completeness.
>>
>> A new system call makes total sense to me.  I have the same concern
>> about the completeness of what's exposed in sysfs, I just don't see a
>> _route_ to completeness with sysfs itself.  Thus, the minimalist
>> approach as a first step.
> 
> Outside of platform-firmware-id to Linux-numa-node-id what other
> userspace API infrastructure does the kernel need to provide? It seems
> userspace enumeration of memory attributes is fully enabled once the
> firmware-to-Linux identification is established.

Which is true if the user space is required to probe the memory attribute
values for the platform-firmware-id from the platform and then request
required memory from corresponding Linux-numa-node-id via standard mm
interfaces like mbind(). But in this patch series we are not mapping
platform-firmware-id to Linux-numa-node-id. We are exporting properties
applicable to Linux nodes (Linux-numa-node-id).

Even if platform-firmware-id to Linux-numa-node-id is required it can
be done through a new file like the following. Applications can just
take the platform_id node and query platform about it's properties.

/sys/devices/system/node/nodeX/platform_id

This above interface would have been okay as its just an extension of
the existing node information on sysfs. But thats not the case with
this proposal.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ