[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190131095121.GA26131@nautica>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2019 10:51:21 +0100
From: Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@...ewreck.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>, Josh Snyder <joshs@...flix.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-api@...r.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
Kevin Easton <kevin@...rana.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@...e.cz>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
Daniel Gruss <daniel@...ss.cc>, Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mm/mincore: make mincore() more conservative
Michal Hocko wrote on Thu, Jan 31, 2019:
> > Change the semantics of mincore() so that it only reveals pagecache information
> > for non-anonymous mappings that belog to files that the calling process could
> > (if it tried to) successfully open for writing.
>
> I agree that this is a better way than the original 574823bfab82
> ("Change mincore() to count "mapped" pages rather than "cached" pages").
> One thing is still not clear to me though. Is the new owner/writeable
> check OK for the Netflix-like usecases? I mean does happycache have
> appropriate access to the cache data? I have tried to re-read the
> original thread but couldn't find any confirmation.
It's enough for my use cases and Josh didn't seem to oppose, but since
he's not in Cc I don't think he would answer -- added him now :)
FWIW happycache writes in the current directory by default so I assume
in the way they use it it would usually have access one way or another.
> If this still doesn't help happycache kind of workloads then we should
> add a capability check IMO but this looks like a decent foundation to
> me.
the inode_owner_or_capable/inode_permission helpers already do allow
quite a few capabilities there
--
Dominique
Powered by blists - more mailing lists