linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv4 02/17] zram: do not use per-CPU compression streams

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: <u3yog2zhhmqkiwhugvhslsn2nzacleoiiw4mylhocsevxr2h6p@q5s4exyjkfiv>
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2025 17:22:48 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>
To: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>
Cc: Kairui Song <ryncsn@...il.com>, 
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 02/17] zram: do not use per-CPU compression streams

On (25/02/06 16:22), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> I didn't know it was possible to use per-CPU data and still have
> preemption enabled at the same time.  So I'm not opposed to the
> idea of still having per-CPU streams and do what zswap folks did.

Maybe that's actually a preferable option.   Allocation of streams
on-demand has a problem that streams' constructors need to use proper
GFP flags (they still use GFP_KERNEL, wrongly), and so on.  Keeping
things the way they are (per-CPU) but adding a preemption is likely
a safer and nicer option.