linux-kernel - Re: [External] Re: [PATCH 0/3] mm: replace atomic_t with percpu

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: <36e3df6c-0f70-96e5-51e2-55870b134713@bytedance.com>
Date:   Sun, 15 Jan 2023 00:10:17 +0800
From:   Zhongkun He <hezhongkun.hzk@...edance.com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Cc:     akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        wuyun.abel@...edance.com
Subject: Re: [External] Re: [PATCH 0/3] mm: replace atomic_t with percpu_ref
 in mempolicy.

> On Fri 13-01-23 17:20:39, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>
>> This is really hard to follow. Without having the context from previous
>> discussions I would be completely lost. Please structure your cover
>> letter but also other patch in general in the form:
>> - what is the problem you would like to deal with
>> 	- want to introduce pidfd_set_mempolicy because XYZ
>> - what stands in the way
>> 	- mempolicy objects access constrains (reliance on operating in
>> 	  the current context)
>> 	- reference counting needs to be unconditional
>> 	- why regular reference counting is not sufficient (performance)
>> - what is this patchset proposing
>> 	- per cpu reference counting
>> 	- how is it implemented
>> - how is the patch series structured
>> 	- make the reference counting unconditional
>> 	- special case static (never released) policies
>> 	- replace standard ref counting by per-cpu reference counting
> 	- introduce pidfd_set_mempolicy
>> - how has this been tested?

Hi Michal, thanks for your review and suggestions.

I will follow the advice above to structure the letter and
split the patches smaller on next version.

Thanks.