linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] page_alloc: consider highatomic reserve in wmartermark fast

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 11 Jun 2020 16:11:16 +0100
From:   Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
To:     Jaewon Kim <jaewon31.kim@...sung.com>
Cc:     Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
        Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>, minchan@...nel.org,
        hannes@...xchg.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jaewon31.kim@...il.com,
        ytk.lee@...sung.com, cmlaika.kim@...sung.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] page_alloc: consider highatomic reserve in wmartermark
 fast

On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 10:43:20AM +0900, Jaewon Kim wrote:
> > That's fine, I simply wanted to illustrate where I thought the check
> > should go to minimise the impact to the majority of allocations.
> Hello Mel.
> Can I understand that you also agrees on checking highatomic reserved?
> 

Yes, I think it should be ok.

> Additionally I've wondered why the number of  highatomic free pages is not
> accurately counted like cma free. Is there any concern on counting it?

At the time, the cost of tracking it with 100% accuracy was not worth
it due to a reliance on the pageblock types to protect the regions from
other allocation types.

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs