linux-kernel - Re: [External] Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] zram: charge the compressed RAM to the page's memcgroup

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CACSyD1M9ad6wTeT-jAtAyWz2LztLrRok8bVT56+Xbx-NReRe7g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 10 Jul 2023 22:59:18 +0800
From:   贺中坤 <hezhongkun.hzk@...edance.com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Cc:     minchan@...nel.org, senozhatsky@...omium.org, david@...hat.com,
        yosryahmed@...gle.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [External] Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] zram: charge the compressed RAM to
 the page's memcgroup

>
> AFAICS your obj_cgroup_charge_zram doesn't have gfp argument.
>
> Anyway, memalloc_noreclaim_save is an abuse IMHO (the primary purpose of
> the flag is to prevent recursion into the memory reclaim). Do you really
> can not perform any memory recalim to trigger to free up some memory if
> the memcg is at the hard limit boundary?
>

Got it . I agree, memalloc_noreclaim_save should not be used, but return nomem
directly,which is more clear and satisfies both direct and indirect usage.