linux-kernel - Re: [v2 RFC PATCH 0/9] Another Approach to Use PMEM as NUMA Node

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <8bc32012-b747-3827-1814-91942357d170@linux.alibaba.com>
Date:   Tue, 16 Apr 2019 16:17:44 -0700
From:   Yang Shi <yang.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>
To:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc:     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, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [v2 RFC PATCH 0/9] Another Approach to Use PMEM as NUMA Node



On 4/16/19 4:04 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 4/16/19 2:59 PM, Yang Shi wrote:
>> On 4/16/19 2:22 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
>>> Keith Busch had a set of patches to let you specify the demotion order
>>> via sysfs for fun.  The rules we came up with were:
>>> 1. Pages keep no history of where they have been
>>> 2. Each node can only demote to one other node
>> Does this mean any remote node? Or just DRAM to PMEM, but remote PMEM
>> might be ok?
> In Keith's code, I don't think we differentiated.  We let any node
> demote to any other node you want, as long as it follows the cycle rule.

I recall Keith's code let the userspace define the target node. Anyway, 
we may need add one rule: not migrate-on-reclaim from PMEM node. 
Demoting from PMEM to DRAM sounds pointless.