linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 2/3] mm/vmalloc: add support for __GFP

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, 20 Oct 2021 17:00:28 +0200
From:   Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Cc:     Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@...il.com>,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/3] mm/vmalloc: add support for __GFP_NOFAIL

>
> On Wed 20-10-21 16:29:14, Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 4:06 PM Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com> wrote:
> [...]
> > > As I've said I am OK with either of the two. Do you or anybody have any
> > > preference? Without any explicit event to wake up for neither of the two
> > > is more than just an optimistic retry.
> > >
> > From power perspective it is better to have a delay, so i tend to say
> > that delay is better.
>
> I am a terrible random number generator. Can you give me a number
> please?
>
Well, we can start from one jiffy so it is one timer tick: schedule_timeout(1)

-- 
Uladzislau Rezki