linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC v2 0/4] mm/ksm: add option to automerge VMAs

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]

Date:   Wed, 15 May 2019 16:24:19 +0200
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:     Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@...hat.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@...tuozzo.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>,
        Timofey Titovets <nefelim4ag@...il.com>,
        Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@...hat.com>,
        Grzegorz Halat <ghalat@...hat.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-api@...r.kernel.org, Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 0/4] mm/ksm: add option to automerge VMAs

On Wed 15-05-19 10:51:58, Oleksandr Natalenko wrote:
> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 10:33:21AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > For my current setup with 2 Firefox instances I get 100 to 200 MiB saved
> > > for the second instance depending on the amount of tabs.
> > 
> > What does prevent Firefox (an opensource project) to be updated to use
> > the explicit merging?
> 
> This was rather an example of a big project. Other big projects may be
> closed source, of course.

Again, specific examples are usually considered a much better
justification than "something might use the feature".

[...]

> > OK, this makes more sense. Please note that there are other people who
> > would like to see certain madvise operations to be done on a remote
> > process - e.g. to allow external memory management (Android would like
> > to control memory aging so something like MADV_DONTNEED without loosing
> > content and more probably) and potentially other madvise operations.
> > Or maybe we need a completely new interface other than madvise.
> 
> I didn't know about those intentions. Could you please point me to a
> relevant discussion so that I can check the details?

I am sorry I do not have any specific links to patches under discussion.
We have discussed that topic at LSFMM this year
(https://lwn.net/Articles/787217/) and Google guys should be sending
something soon.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs