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  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, 13 Aug 2020 19:22:37 +0200
From:   Michal Hocko <>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <>
Cc:     Uladzislau Rezki <>,,
        LKML <>, RCU <>,, Andrew Morton <>,
        Vlastimil Babka <>,
        Matthew Wilcox <>,
        "Theodore Y . Ts'o" <>,
        Joel Fernandes <>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <>,
        Oleksiy Avramchenko <>,
        Peter Zijlstra <>
Subject: Re: [RFC-PATCH 1/2] mm: Add __GFP_NO_LOCKS flag

On Thu 13-08-20 19:09:29, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Michal Hocko <> writes:
> > On Thu 13-08-20 16:34:57, Thomas Gleixner wrote:

I will go though the rest of the email tomorrow.

> >> Really, if your primary lockless caches are empty then any allocation
> >> which comes from deep atomic context should simply always fail. Being
> >> stuck in an interrupt handler or even deeper for 200+ microseconds
> >> waiting for zone lock is just bonkers IMO.
> >
> > That would require changing NOWAIT/ATOMIC allocations semantic quite
> > drastically for !RT kernels as well. I am not sure this is something we
> > can do. Or maybe I am just missing your point.
> I really do not understand why you think that it affects everything. 

We are likely not on the same page here. Are you talking about the
original proposal in this thread (aka a new flag) or a way to reuse
existing gfp space (
with a modification that would both silence the lockdep and keep the
existing NOWAIT semantic?

Sorry bear with me but I am getting lost in this thread.
Michal Hocko

Powered by blists - more mailing lists