linux-kernel - Re: [Potential Spoof] [PATCH v2 0/5] mm: memcg accounting of percpu memory

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:   Wed, 17 Jun 2020 13:39:49 -0700
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>
Cc:     Dennis Zhou <dennis@...nel.org>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        <kernel-team@...com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Potential Spoof] [PATCH v2 0/5] mm: memcg accounting of percpu
 memory

On Tue, 16 Jun 2020 14:19:01 -0700 Roman Gushchin <guro@...com> wrote:

> > 
> > This version is based on top of v6 of the new slab controller
> > patchset. The following patches are actually required by this series:
> >   mm: memcg: factor out memcg- and lruvec-level changes out of __mod_lruvec_state()
> >   mm: memcg: prepare for byte-sized vmstat items
> >   mm: memcg: convert vmstat slab counters to bytes
> >   mm: slub: implement SLUB version of obj_to_index()
> >   mm: memcontrol: decouple reference counting from page accounting
> >   mm: memcg/slab: obj_cgroup API
> 
> Hello, Andrew!
> 
> How this patchset should be routed: through the mm or percpu tree?
> 
> It has been acked by Dennis (the percpu maintainer), but it does depend
> on first several patches from the slab controller rework patchset.

I can grab both.

> The slab controller rework is ready to be merged: as in v6 most patches
> in the series were acked by Johannes and/or Vlastimil and no questions
> or concerns were raised after v6.
> 
> Please, let me know if you want me to resend both patchsets.

There was quite a bit of valuable discussion in response to [0/n] which
really should have been in the changelog[s] from day one. 
slab-vs-slub, performance testing, etc.

So, umm, I'll take a look at both series now but I do think an enhanced
[0/n] description is warranted?