linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm/compaction: remove low watermark cap for proactive compaction

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: <CA+CK2bCqwEz7SEsn5=VcdpuMBEThC2T3oy399JBGuEvHXYFOAA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2025 11:03:14 -0500
From: Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>
To: Michal Clapinski <mclapinski@...gle.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Nitin Gupta <nigupta@...dia.com>, 
	Pasha Tatashin <tatashin@...gle.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm/compaction: remove low watermark cap for proactive compaction

On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 1:21 PM Michal Clapinski <mclapinski@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> Previously a min cap of 5 has been set in the commit introducing
> proactive compaction. This was to make sure users don't hurt themselves
> by setting the proactiveness to 100 and making their system
> unresponsive. But the compaction mechanism has a backoff mechanism that
> will sleep for 30s if no progress is made, so I don't see a significant
> risk here. My system (20GB of memory) has been perfectly fine with
> proactiveness set to 100 and leeway set to 0.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Clapinski <mclapinski@...gle.com>

Reviewed-by: Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>

Thank you,
Pasha