linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] mm: Page fault enhancements

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:   Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:06:04 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
Cc:     Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
        Maya Gokhale <gokhale2@...l.gov>,
        Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
        Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...tuozzo.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Martin Cracauer <cracauer@...s.org>,
        Marty McFadden <mcfadden8@...l.gov>, Shaohua Li <shli@...com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
        Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
        Denis Plotnikov <dplotnikov@...tuozzo.com>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
        "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
        "Dr . David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] mm: Page fault enhancements

On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 3:15 AM Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> This series is split out of userfaultfd-wp series to only cover the
> general page fault changes, since it seems to make sense itself.

The series continues to look sane to me, but I'd like VM people to
take a look. I see a few reviewed-by's, it would be nice to see more
comments from people. I'd like to see Andrea in particular say "yeah,
this looks all good to me".

Also a question on how this will get to me - it smells like Andrew's
-mm tree to me, both from a VM and a userfaultfd angle (and looking
around, at least a couple of previous patches by Peter have gone that
way).

And it would be lovely to have actual _numbers_ for the alleged
latency improvements. I 100% believe them, but still, numbers rule.

Talking about latency, what about that retry loop in gup()? That's the
one I'm not at all convinced about. It doesn't check for signals, so
if there is some retry logic, it loops forever. Hmm?

             Linus