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]
Message-ID: <CAE=gft6LmTKx2JHAj7GBmph_1BrioXhmtn_xQEHtRhK+tPa6qw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 3 Aug 2021 11:00:51 -0700
From:   Evan Green <evgreen@...omium.org>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
        linux-api@...r.kernel.org, Alex Shi <alexs@...nel.org>,
        Alistair Popple <apopple@...dia.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
        "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@...radead.org>,
        Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>,
        Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
        Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] mm: Enable suspend-only swap spaces

On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 2:18 PM Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 27 Jul 2021 09:31:33 -0700 Evan Green <evgreen@...omium.org> wrote:
>
> > > Pavel just mentioned uswsusp, and I wonder if it would be a possible
> > > alternative to this patch.
> >
> > I think you're right that it would be possible to isolate the
> > hibernate image with uswsusp if you avoid using the SNAPSHOT_*SWAP*
> > ioctls. But I'd expect performance to suffer noticeably, since now
> > every page is making a round trip out to usermode and back. I'd still
> > very much use the HIBERNATE_ONLY flag if it were accepted, I think
> > there's value to it.
>
> The uswsusp option makes your patch a performance optimization rather
> than a feature-add.  And we do like to see quantitative testing results
> when considering a performance optimization.  Especially when the
> performance optimization is a bit icky, putting special-case testing
> all over the place, maintenance cost, additional testing effort, etc.
>
> I do think that diligence demands that we quantify the difference.  Is
> this a thing you can help with?

I'm wrong about the performance. Uswsusp is just as fast, and possibly
faster in my use case than kernel-driven hibernate. What's more,
uswsusp also helps me solve several additional problems I hadn't
tackled yet that were looming in front of me. Thanks all for your
patience and thoughtful review on this.

Patch withdrawn.
-Evan

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ