linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Cgroup-based THP control

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: <ZyTXYnbDfGYGuxlt@tiehlicka>
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2024 14:28:02 +0100
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
To: Stepanov Anatoly <stepanov.anatoly@...wei.com>
Cc: Gutierrez Asier <gutierrez.asier@...wei-partners.com>,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, david@...hat.com, ryan.roberts@....com,
	baohua@...nel.org, willy@...radead.org, peterx@...hat.com,
	hannes@...xchg.org, hocko@...nel.org, roman.gushchin@...ux.dev,
	shakeel.butt@...ux.dev, muchun.song@...ux.dev,
	cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	alexander.kozhevnikov@...wei-partners.com, guohanjun@...wei.com,
	weiyongjun1@...wei.com, wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com,
	judy.chenhui@...wei.com, yusongping@...wei.com,
	artem.kuzin@...wei.com, kang.sun@...wei.com,
	nikita.panov@...wei-partners.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Cgroup-based THP control

On Fri 01-11-24 16:24:55, Stepanov Anatoly wrote:
> On 11/1/2024 4:15 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Fri 01-11-24 14:54:27, Stepanov Anatoly wrote:
> >> On 11/1/2024 10:35 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >>> On Thu 31-10-24 17:37:12, Stepanov Anatoly wrote:
> >>>> If we consider the inheritance approach (prctl + launcher), it's fine until we need to change
> >>>> THP mode property for several tasks at once, in this case some batch-change approach needed.
> >>>
> >>> I do not follow. How is this any different from a single process? Or do
> >>> you mean to change the mode for an already running process?
> >>>
> >> yes, for already running set of processes
> > 
> 
> > Why is that preferred over setting the policy upfront?
> Setting the policy in advance is fine, as the first step to do.
> But we might not know in advance
> which exact policy is the most beneficial for one set of apps or another.

How do you plan to find that out when the application is running
already?
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs