linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv4 00/13] Heterogeneuos memory node attributes

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]

Date:   Thu, 17 Jan 2019 23:58:21 +1100
From:   Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>
To:     Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Rafael Wysocki <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 00/13] Heterogeneuos memory node attributes

On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 10:57:51AM -0700, Keith Busch wrote:
> The series seems quite calm now. I've received some approvals of the
> on the proposal, and heard no objections on the new core interfaces.
> 
> Please let me know if there is anyone or group of people I should request
> and wait for a review. And if anyone reading this would like additional
> time as well before I post a potentially subsequent version, please let
> me know.
> 
> I also wanted to inquire on upstream strategy if/when all desired
> reviews are received. The series is spanning a few subsystems, so I'm
> not sure who's tree is the best candidate. I could see an argument for
> driver-core, acpi, or mm as possible paths. Please let me know if there's
> a more appropriate option or any other gating concerns.
> 
> == Changes from v3 ==
> 
>   I've fixed the documentation issues that have been raised for v3 
> 
>   Moved the hmat files according to Rafael's recommendation
> 
>   Added received Reviewed-by's
> 
> Otherwise this v4 is much the same as v3.
> 
> == Background ==
> 
> Platforms may provide multiple types of cpu attached system memory. The
> memory ranges for each type may have different characteristics that
> applications may wish to know about when considering what node they want
> their memory allocated from. 
> 
> It had previously been difficult to describe these setups as memory
> rangers were generally lumped into the NUMA node of the CPUs. New
> platform attributes have been created and in use today that describe
> the more complex memory hierarchies that can be created.
> 

Could you please expand on this text -- how are these attributes
exposed/consumed by both the kernel and user space?

> This series' objective is to provide the attributes from such systems
> that are useful for applications to know about, and readily usable with
> existing tools and libraries.

I presume these tools and libraries are numactl and mbind()?

Balbir Singh.