[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YoTjJH7+QD+DSrW8@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date: Wed, 18 May 2022 14:14:28 +0200
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
To: CGEL <cgel.zte@...il.com>
Cc: Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
ammarfaizi2@...weeb.org, oleksandr@...alenko.name,
willy@...radead.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, corbet@....net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, xu xin <xu.xin16@....com.cn>,
Yang Yang <yang.yang29@....com.cn>,
Ran Xiaokai <ran.xiaokai@....com.cn>,
wangyong <wang.yong12@....com.cn>,
Yunkai Zhang <zhang.yunkai@....com.cn>,
Jiang Xuexin <jiang.xuexin@....com.cn>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/ksm: introduce ksm_enabled for each processg
On Wed 18-05-22 07:40:30, CGEL wrote:
[...]
> 2. process_madvise is still a kind of madvise. processs_madvise from
> another process overrides the intention of origin app code ifself that
> also calls madvise, which is unrecoverable. For example, if a process "A"
> which madvises just one part of VMAs (not all) as MERGEABLE run on the OS
> already, meanwhile, if another process which doesn't know the information
> of "A" 's MERGEABLE areas, then call process_madvise to advise all VMAs of
> "A" as MERGEABLE, the original MERGEABLE information of "A" calling madivse
> is erasured permanently.
I do not really follow. How is this any different from an external
process modifying the process wide policy via the proc or any other
interface?
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists