linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] MAINTAINERS: add further core files to mm core section

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: <c8d6c655-282c-41a7-9cae-a18e0cc5e15d@lucifer.local>
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2025 16:22:33 +0100
From: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>
To: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@...ux.dev>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "Liam R . Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
        Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] MAINTAINERS: add further core files to mm core
 section

On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 03:56:02PM -0700, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 11:10:41PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > On 16.06.25 22:38, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> > > There are a number of files which don't quite belong anywhere else, so
> > > place them in the core section. If we determine in future they belong
> > > elsewhere we can update incrementally but it is preferable that we assign
> > > each file to a section as best we can.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>
> > > ---
> > > REVIEWERS - let me know if these seem appropriate, I'm eyeballing
> > > this. even if they are not quite best placed a 'best effort' is still
> > > worthwhile so we establish a place to put all mm files, we can always
> > > incrementally update these later.
> > >
> > >   MAINTAINERS | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> > >   1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> > > index 4523a6409186..a61d56bd7aa4 100644
> > > --- a/MAINTAINERS
> > > +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> > > @@ -15740,10 +15740,6 @@ F:	include/linux/memory_hotplug.h
> > >   F:	include/linux/memory-tiers.h
> > >   F:	include/linux/mempolicy.h
> > >   F:	include/linux/mempool.h
> > > -F:	include/linux/memremap.h
> > > -F:	include/linux/mmzone.h
> > > -F:	include/linux/mmu_notifier.h
> > > -F:	include/linux/pagewalk.h
> > >   F:	include/trace/events/ksm.h
> > >   F:	mm/
> > >   F:	tools/mm/
> >
> > Probably better to have some section than none ... was just briefly
> > wondering if "CORE" is the right section for some of that. Some of that
> > might be better of in a "MM MISC" section, maybe.
> >
> > > @@ -15764,16 +15760,40 @@ S:	Maintained
> > >   W:	http://www.linux-mm.org
> > >   T:	git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm
> > >   F:	include/linux/memory.h
> > > +F:	include/linux/memremap.h
> > >   F:	include/linux/mm.h
> > >   F:	include/linux/mm_*.h
> > >   F:	include/linux/mmdebug.h
> > > +F:	include/linux/mmu_notifier.h
> > > +F:	include/linux/mmzone.h
> > >   F:	include/linux/pagewalk.h
> > >   F:	kernel/fork.c
> > >   F:	mm/Kconfig
> > >   F:	mm/debug.c
> > > +F:	mm/debug_page_ref.c
> > > +F:	mm/debug_vm_pgtable.c
> >
> > Wondering if there should be a MM DEBUG section. But then, no idea who in
> > their right mind would be willing to maintain that ;)
> >
> > > +F:	mm/folio-compat.c
> > > +F:	mm/highmem.c
> > >   F:	mm/init-mm.c
> > > +F:	mm/internal.h
> > > +F:	mm/interval_tree.c
> > > +F:	mm/io-mapping.c> +F:	mm/ioremap.c
> > > +F:	mm/list_lru.c
> >
> > Smells like reclaim/memcg.
>
> Shrinker might be more appropriate (along with the list_lru.h)

Yeah I struggled with this one. It's a weird one, it's like a generic LRU
algorithm:

zswap_lru_add()
binder_lru_freelist_add()
-> list_lru_add()

Also called internally by list_lru_add_obj() which is used for dentry LRUs by a
number of filesystems

But also by the working set code in workingset_update_node() :)

So it's a bit all over the place.

I wonder whether best for mm misc as a result?

>
> >
> > > +F:	mm/maccess.c
> > > +F:	mm/mapping_dirty_helpers.c
> > >   F:	mm/memory.c> +F:	mm/memremap.c
> >
> > memory hotplug related. Well, one could argue that it's just a memory
> > hotplug user. It's mostly ZONE_DEVICE handling. Wonder if that would be
> > worth a separate section ...
> >
> > > +F:	mm/mmu_notifier.c
> > > +F:	mm/mmzone.c
> > > +F:	mm/oom_kill.c
> >
> > This contains quite some meat. I wonder if a OOM section would be
> > appropriate (Michal, I'm looking at you :) )
> >
>
> I think Michal already has a patch on OOM section which I expect he will
> send out soon.
>

Yes saw that and acked that thanks :)