linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] cgroup: nmi safe css_rstat

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: <aFG8mZOOwl9s5ySm@slm.duckdns.org>
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2025 09:06:01 -1000
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@...ux.dev>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	JP Kobryn <inwardvessel@...il.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
	Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>,
	Muchun Song <muchun.song@...ux.dev>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
	Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>,
	Harry Yoo <harry.yoo@...cle.com>,
	Yosry Ahmed <yosry.ahmed@...ux.dev>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Meta kernel team <kernel-team@...a.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] cgroup: nmi safe css_rstat_updated

On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 12:20:28PM -0700, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 08:15:17AM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 03:15:28PM -0700, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> > > Shakeel Butt (4):
> > >   cgroup: support to enable nmi-safe css_rstat_updated
> > >   cgroup: make css_rstat_updated nmi safe
> > >   cgroup: remove per-cpu per-subsystem locks
> > >   memcg: cgroup: call css_rstat_updated irrespective of in_nmi()
> > 
> > The patches look good to me. How should it be routed? Should I take all
> > four, just the first three or would it better to route all through -mm?
> > 
> 
> I would like all four to be together and since most of the code is in
> cgroup, cgroup tree makes more sense unless Andrew has different
> opinion.

Okay, I'll route them through cgroup. The patches don't apply cleanly on
cgroup/for-6.17. Can you please send a refreshed set?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun