linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 1/4] drivers/base/node: Add demotion

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]

Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2024 07:31:48 +0000
From: "Zhijian Li (Fujitsu)" <lizhijian@...itsu.com>
To: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Greg Kroah-Hartman
	<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, "rafael@...nel.org" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>, "Yasunori Gotou (Fujitsu)"
	<y-goto@...itsu.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Jagdish Gediya <jvgediya@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/4] drivers/base/node: Add demotion_nodes sys
 infterface



On 02/02/2024 16:19, Huang, Ying wrote:
>> Back to our initial requirement:
>> When demotion is enabled, what's the demotion path, especially the preferred node?
>> are they consistent with administrator's expectations?"
>>
>> It seems there is no a direct answer. But actually, kernel have already known
>> this information, IMHO, exposing them to users is not a bad choice.
>>
>> This information is able to help them adjust/tune the machine before really
>> deploy their workloads.
>>
>> If the sysfs approach isn't better enough, is it possible to have another more
>> user-friendly way to convey this information? like the allocation fallback order does,
>> simply print them to dmesg?
> I have no object to print some demotion information in dmesg.
> 

Thank you for sharing your thoughts and feedback on this.
I will attempt to do so.


Thanks
Zhijian