linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] mm/mempolicy: Add memory hotplug support in weighted interleave

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]

Message-ID: <Z8trXFxJVlYI9LAF@gourry-fedora-PF4VCD3F>
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2025 16:55:40 -0500
From: Gregory Price <gourry@...rry.net>
To: Rakie Kim <rakie.kim@...com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org,
	joshua.hahnjy@...il.com, dan.j.williams@...el.com,
	ying.huang@...ux.alibaba.com, kernel_team@...ynix.com,
	honggyu.kim@...com, yunjeong.mun@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] mm/mempolicy: Add memory hotplug support in weighted
 interleave

On Fri, Mar 07, 2025 at 10:56:04AM -0500, Gregory Price wrote:
> 
> I think the underlying issue you're dealing with is that the system is
> creating more nodes for you than it should.
> 

Looking into this for other reasons, I think you are right that multiple
numa nodes can exist that cover the same memory - just different
regions.

I can see why you would want to hide the nodes that don't actively have
memory online, but i still have concerns for nodes that may come and
go and hiding this configuration from the user until memory arrives.

An example would be a DCD device where a node could add or remove memory
at any time.  If you removed the last block of memory, the node would
disappear - but the block could come back at any time.  That seems
problematic, as you might want to manage that node while no memory is
present.

~Gregory