linux-kernel - Re: [v2 PATCH 7/9] mm: vmscan: check if the demote target node is contended or not

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: <9bcf765c-c051-9086-b3fe-679adbe239cb@intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 15 Apr 2019 15:13:03 -0700
From:   Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To:     Yang Shi <yang.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>, mhocko@...e.com,
        mgorman@...hsingularity.net, riel@...riel.com, hannes@...xchg.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, keith.busch@...el.com,
        dan.j.williams@...el.com, fengguang.wu@...el.com, fan.du@...el.com,
        ying.huang@...el.com, ziy@...dia.com
Cc:     linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [v2 PATCH 7/9] mm: vmscan: check if the demote target node is
 contended or not

On 4/15/19 3:06 PM, Yang Shi wrote:
>>>
>> This seems like an actively bad idea to me.
>>
>> Why do we need an *active* note to say the node is contended?  Why isn't
>> just getting a failure back from migrate_pages() enough?  Have you
>> observed this in practice?
> 
> The flag will be used to check if the target node is contended or not
> before moving the page into the demotion list. If the target node is
> contended (i.e. GFP_NOWAIT would likely fail), the page reclaim code
> even won't scan anonymous page list on swapless system.

That seems like the actual problem that needs to get fixed.

On systems where we have demotions available, perhaps we need to start
scanning anonymous pages again, at least for zones where we *can* demote
from them.