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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Wed, 26 Oct 2022 13:19:48 +0530
From:   Aneesh Kumar K V <aneesh.kumar@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     Feng Tang <feng.tang@...el.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        Zefan Li <lizefan.x@...edance.com>,
        Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, ying.huang@...el.com,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dave.hansen@...el.com,
        tim.c.chen@...el.com, fengwei.yin@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/vmscan: respect cpuset policy during page demotion

On 10/26/22 1:13 PM, Feng Tang wrote:
> In page reclaim path, memory could be demoted from faster memory tier
> to slower memory tier. Currently, there is no check about cpuset's
> memory policy, that even if the target demotion node is not allowd
> by cpuset, the demotion will still happen, which breaks the cpuset
> semantics.
> 
> So add cpuset policy check in the demotion path and skip demotion
> if the demotion targets are not allowed by cpuset.
> 

What about the vma policy or the task memory policy? Shouldn't we respect
those memory policy restrictions while demoting the page? 

-aneesh

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ