linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 7/7] mm: madvise support MADV_ANONYMOUS_FILTER and MADV_FILE

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: <20190530010011.GD229459@google.com>
Date:   Thu, 30 May 2019 10:00:11 +0900
From:   Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
To:     Hillf Danton <hdanton@...a.com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Tim Murray <timmurray@...gle.com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
        Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
        Daniel Colascione <dancol@...gle.com>,
        Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
        Sonny Rao <sonnyrao@...gle.com>,
        Brian Geffon <bgeffon@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 7/7] mm: madvise support MADV_ANONYMOUS_FILTER and
 MADV_FILE_FILTER

On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 12:36:04PM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 20 May 2019 12:52:54 +0900 Minchan Kim wrote:
> > 
> > With that, user could call a process_madvise syscall simply with a entire
> > range(0x0 - 0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF) but either of MADV_ANONYMOUS_FILTER and
> > MADV_FILE_FILTER so there is no need to call the syscall range by range.
> > 
> Cool.
> 
> Look forward to seeing the non-RFC delivery.

I will drop this filter patch if userspace can parse address range fast.
Daniel suggested a new interface which could get necessary information
from the process with binary format so will it will remove endoce/decode
overhead as well as overhead we don't need to get like directory look
up.

Yes, with this filter option, it's best performance for a specific
usecase but sometime we need to give up *best* thing for *general*
stuff. I belive it's one of the category. ;-)