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: <20190211185445.GA3838@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 11 Feb 2019 13:54:45 -0500
From:   Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>
To:     Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
        Felix Kuehling <Felix.Kuehling@....com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@...rosoft.com>,
        Ross Zwisler <zwisler@...nel.org>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@...dia.com>,
        John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/9] mmu notifier provide context informations

On Fri, Feb 01, 2019 at 10:02:30PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Thu 31-01-19 11:10:06, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > 
> > Andrew what is your plan for this ? I had a discussion with Peter Xu
> > and Andrea about change_pte() and kvm. Today the change_pte() kvm
> > optimization is effectively disabled because of invalidate_range
> > calls. With a minimal couple lines patch on top of this patchset
> > we can bring back the kvm change_pte optimization and we can also
> > optimize some other cases like for instance when write protecting
> > after fork (but i am not sure this is something qemu does often so
> > it might not help for real kvm workload).
> > 
> > I will be posting a the extra patch as an RFC, but in the meantime
> > i wanted to know what was the status for this.
> > 
> > Jan, Christian does your previous ACK still holds for this ?
> 
> Yes, I still think the approach makes sense. Dan's concern about in tree
> users is valid but it seems you have those just not merged yet, right?

(Catching up on email)

This version included some of the first users for this but i do not
want to merge them through Andrew but through the individual driver
project tree. Also in the meantime i found a use for this with kvm
and i expect few others users of mmu notifier will leverage this
extra informations.

Cheers,
Jérôme

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ