linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/4] Introduce merge identical pages mechanism

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, 23 Nov 2022 09:07:40 +0000
From:   Aleksey Romanov <AVRomanov@...rdevices.ru>
To:     Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>
CC:     Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        "minchan@...nel.org" <minchan@...nel.org>,
        "ngupta@...are.org" <ngupta@...are.org>,
        "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel <kernel@...rdevices.ru>,
        "Dmitry Rokosov" <DDRokosov@...rdevices.ru>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/4] Introduce merge identical pages mechanism

On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 01:13:55PM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (22/11/22 12:14), Aleksey Romanov wrote:
> > > IIRC that was patent in question:
> > > 
> > > https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/e2/66/9e/0ddbfae5c182ac/US9977598.pdf
> > 
> > I think the patent is talking about "mapping the virtual address" (like
> > in KSM). But zram works with the "handle" abstraction, which is a boxed
> > pointer to the required object. I think my implementation and the patent
> > is slightly different. 
> > 
> > Also, the patent speaks of "compressing" pages. In this case, we can add
> > zs_merge() function (like zs_compact()), that is, remove the merge logic
> > at the allocator level. zsmalloc doesn't say anything about what objects
> > it can work with. Implementation at the zsmalloc level is possible,
> > though more complicated that at the zram level. 
> > 
> > I believe that we can implement at least one of the options I proposed.
> > 
> > What do you think?
> 
> Oh, yeah, I'm not saying that we cannot have something like that
> in zram/zsmalloc, just wanted to give some historical retrospective
> on this and point at some implementation details that should be
> considered.

Okay, in this case, can you review my patches please?

-- 
Thank you,
Alexey