linux-kernel - RE: Another approach of UFSHPB

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: <SN6PR04MB46400AED930A3DC5B94AED25FCB00@SN6PR04MB4640.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Tue, 26 May 2020 06:15:37 +0000
From:   Avri Altman <Avri.Altman@....com>
To:     Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>,
        "daejun7.park@...sung.com" <daejun7.park@...sung.com>,
        yongmyung lee <ymhungry.lee@...sung.com>,
        "James E . J . Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        "Martin K . Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        "linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC:     ALIM AKHTAR <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
        "asutoshd@...eaurora.org" <asutoshd@...eaurora.org>,
        Zang Leigang <zangleigang@...ilicon.com>,
        Avi Shchislowski <Avi.Shchislowski@....com>,
        Bean Huo <beanhuo@...ron.com>,
        "cang@...eaurora.org" <cang@...eaurora.org>,
        "stanley.chu@...iatek.com" <stanley.chu@...iatek.com>,
        MOHAMMED RAFIQ KAMAL BASHA <md.rafiq@...sung.com>,
        Sang-yoon Oh <sangyoon.oh@...sung.com>,
        Jinyoung CHOI <j-young.choi@...sung.com>,
        Adel Choi <adel.choi@...sung.com>,
        BoRam Shin <boram.shin@...sung.com>,
        Sung-Jun Park <sungjun07.park@...sung.com>
Subject: RE: Another approach of UFSHPB

> On 2020-05-24 22:40, Daejun Park wrote:
> > The HPB driver is close to the UFS core function, but it is not essential
> > for operating UFS device. With reference to this article
> > (https://lwn.net/Articles/645810/), we implemented extended UFS-feature
> > as bus model. Because the HPB driver consumes the user's main memory, it
> should
> > support bind / unbind functionality as needed. We implemented the HPB
> driver
> > can be unbind / unload on runtime.
> 
> I do not agree that the bus model is the best choice for freeing cache
> memory if it is no longer needed. A shrinker is probably a much better
> choice because the callback functions in a shrinker get invoked when a
> system is under memory pressure. See also register_shrinker(),
> unregister_shrinker() and struct shrinker in include/linux/shrinker.h.
Since this discussion is closely related to cache allocation,
What is your opinion about allocating the pages dynamically as the regions
Are being activated/deactivated, in oppose of how it is done today - 
Statically on init for the entire max-active-subregions?