linux-kernel - Re: [patch 113/131] mm: balance LRU lists based on relative thrashing

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <a60f7866-3b32-7a0e-5d0a-a48d77f845a8@linux.alibaba.com>
Date:   Tue, 9 Jun 2020 17:15:33 +0800
From:   Alex Shi <alex.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        hannes@...xchg.org, iamjoonsoo.kim@....com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        mhocko@...e.com, minchan@...nel.org, mm-commits@...r.kernel.org,
        riel@...riel.com, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [patch 113/131] mm: balance LRU lists based on relative thrashing



在 2020/6/4 上午7:03, Andrew Morton 写道:
>  
> +	/* XXX: Move to lru_cache_add() when it supports new vs putback */

Hi Hannes,

Sorry for a bit lost, would you like to explain a bit more of your idea here?

> +	spin_lock_irq(&page_pgdat(page)->lru_lock);
> +	lru_note_cost(page);
> +	spin_unlock_irq(&page_pgdat(page)->lru_lock);
> +


What could we see here w/o the lru_lock?

Thanks
Alex