linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v10 00/14] Multi-Gen LRU Framework

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: <CAOUHufbaPR3H2KcYywCf0ycFWh=2Nf1PwiO4t8tO6TXB9U1MwA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 7 Apr 2022 03:41:15 -0600
From:   Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Aneesh Kumar <aneesh.kumar@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Barry Song <21cnbao@...il.com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Hillf Danton <hdanton@...a.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Jesse Barnes <jsbarnes@...gle.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
        Michael Larabel <Michael@...haellarabel.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Ying Huang <ying.huang@...el.com>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Kernel Page Reclaim v2 <page-reclaim@...gle.com>,
        "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 00/14] Multi-Gen LRU Framework

On Thu, Apr 7, 2022 at 2:31 AM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Hi Yu,
>
> On Wed, 6 Apr 2022 21:24:27 -0600 Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com> wrote:
> >
> > Can you please include this patchset in linux-next? Git repo for you to fetch:
> >
> > https://linux-mm.googlesource.com/mglru for-linux-next
>
> I get a message saying "This repository is empty. Push to it to show
> branches and history." :-(

Sorry about this. It should work now.

> > My goal is to get additional test coverage before I send a pull
> > request for 5.19 to Linus.
>
> Good idea :-)
>
> > I've explored all avenues, but ultimately I've failed to rally
> > substantial support from the MM stakeholders [1]. There are no pending
> > technical issues against this patchset [2]. What is more concerning
> > are the fundamental disagreements on priorities, methodologies, etc.
> > that are not specific to this patchset and have been hindering our
> > progress as a collective. (Cheers to the mutual dissatisfaction.)
>
> I have not been following the discussion as I am not an mm person, but
> this is not a good sign.
>
> > While we plan to discuss those issues during the LSFMM next month, it
> > doesn't seem reasonable to leave this patchset hanging in the air,
> > since it has reached its maturity a while ago and there are strong
> > demands from downstream kernels as well as a large user base. Thus I
> > sent that pull request to Linus a couple of weeks ago, implying that
> > he would have to make the final decision soon.
> >
> > I hope this gives enough background about what's been going on with
> > this patchset. If you decide to take it and it causes you any
> > troubles, please feel free to yell at me.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220104202227.2903605-1-yuzhao@google.com/
> > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220326010003.3155137-1-yuzhao@google.com/
>
> I had a look at those threads and I guess things are better that your
> comment above implies.
>
> So, a couple of questions:
>
> Have you done a trial merge with a current linux-next tree to see what
> sort of mess/pain we may already be in?

Yes, the repo I prepared for you is based on the latest linux-next.
There shouldn't be any conflicts.

> Is it all stable enough now that it could be sent as a patch series for
> Andrew to include in mmotm (with perhaps just smallish followup patches)?

Yes, on multiple occasions, e.g., [1][2][3], I've claimed this
patchset has an unprecedented test coverage and nobody has proven
otherwise so far.

Andrew suggested a cycle in linux-next [4]. So here we are :)

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/YdSuSHa%2FVjl6bPkg@google.com/
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/r/YdiKVJlClB3h1Kmg@google.com/
[3] https://lore.kernel.org/r/YgR+MfXjpg82QyBT@google.com/
[4] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220326134928.ad739eeecd5d0855dbdc6257@linux-foundation.org/