linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm: Always sanity check anon

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: Sat, 13 Apr 2024 23:46:28 +0100
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
Cc: Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>,
	"Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Lokesh Gidra <lokeshgidra@...gle.com>,
	Alistair Popple <apopple@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Always sanity check anon_vma first for per-vma locks

On Sat, Apr 13, 2024 at 02:41:55PM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> The patch looks good to me but I would like to run benchmark tests to
> see how it affects different workloads (both positive and negative
> effects). I'll try to do that in this coming week and will report if I
> find any considerable difference. For now:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
> 
> Also we should ensure that this patch goes together with the next one
> adjusting related code in uffd. It would be better to resend them as
> one patchset to avoid confusion.

I've put them here:

http://git.infradead.org/?p=users/willy/pagecache.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/vma-lock

0day has already run build tests, and I'm assured that they'll run perf
tests in the next few days.