linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v1 00/11] Manage the top tier memory in a tiered 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, 14 Apr 2021 16:22:34 -0700
From:   Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>, Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com>
Cc:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Ying Huang <ying.huang@...el.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Cgroups <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 00/11] Manage the top tier memory in a tiered
 memory



On 4/8/21 1:29 PM, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 11:01 AM Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com> wrote:

> 
> The low and min limits have semantics similar to the v1's soft limit
> for this situation i.e. letting the low priority job occupy top tier
> memory and depending on reclaim to take back the excess top tier
> memory use of such jobs.
> 
> I have some thoughts on NUMA node limits which I will share in the other thread.
> 

Shakeel,

Look forward to the proposal on NUMA node limits.  Which thread are
you going to post it?  Want to make sure I didn't miss it.

Tim