linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 5/5] mm, page_alloc: Introduce ZONELIST_FALLBACK_SAME

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: <20190425084302.GQ12751@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date:   Thu, 25 Apr 2019 10:43:02 +0200
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:     "Du, Fan" <fan.du@...el.com>
Cc:     "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "Wu, Fengguang" <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
        "Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        "Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        "xishi.qiuxishi@...baba-inc.com" <xishi.qiuxishi@...baba-inc.com>,
        "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 5/5] mm, page_alloc: Introduce
 ZONELIST_FALLBACK_SAME_TYPE fallback list

On Thu 25-04-19 08:20:28, Du, Fan wrote:
> 
> 
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: owner-linux-mm@...ck.org [mailto:owner-linux-mm@...ck.org] On
> >Behalf Of Michal Hocko
> >Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2019 4:10 PM
> >To: Du, Fan <fan.du@...el.com>
> >Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org; Wu, Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>;
> >Williams, Dan J <dan.j.williams@...el.com>; Hansen, Dave
> ><dave.hansen@...el.com>; xishi.qiuxishi@...baba-inc.com; Huang, Ying
> ><ying.huang@...el.com>; linux-mm@...ck.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> >Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 5/5] mm, page_alloc: Introduce
> >ZONELIST_FALLBACK_SAME_TYPE fallback list
> >
> >On Thu 25-04-19 07:55:58, Du, Fan wrote:
> >> >> PMEM is good for frequently read accessed page, e.g. page cache(implicit
> >> >> page
> >> >> request), or user space data base (explicit page request)
> >> >> For now this patch create GFP_SAME_NODE_TYPE for such cases,
> >additional
> >> >> Implementation will be followed up.
> >> >
> >> >Then simply configure that NUMA node as movable and you get these
> >> >allocations for any movable allocation. I am not really convinced a new
> >> >gfp flag is really justified.
> >>
> >> Case 1: frequently write and/or read accessed page deserved to DRAM
> >
> >NUMA balancing
> 
> Sorry, I mean page cache case here.
> Numa balancing works for pages mapped in pagetable style.

I would still expect that a remote PMEM node access latency is
smaller/comparable to the real storage so a promoting part is not that
important for the unmapped pagecache. Maybe I am wrong here but that
really begs for some experiments before we start adding special casing.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs