linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] mm/memcg: make memory.reclaim interface generic

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: <20250623233628.kv4c4k74rdpfek7x@offworld>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2025 16:36:28 -0700
From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: mhocko@...nel.org, hannes@...xchg.org, roman.gushchin@...ux.dev,
	shakeel.butt@...ux.dev, yosryahmed@...gle.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] mm/memcg: make memory.reclaim interface generic

On Mon, 23 Jun 2025, Andrew Morton wrote:

>On Mon, 23 Jun 2025 11:58:49 -0700 Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net> wrote:
>
>> This adds a general call for both parsing as well as the
>> common reclaim semantics. memcg is still the only user and
>> no change in semantics.
>>
>> +int user_proactive_reclaim(char *buf,
>> +			   struct mem_cgroup *memcg, pg_data_t *pgdat);
>
>Feeling nitty, is this a good name for it?  It's hard to imagine what a
>function called "user_proactive_reclaim" actually does.

I'm open to another name, sure. But imo the chosen one is actually pretty
descriptive: you know it's coming from userspace (justifying the 'buf'),
you know this is not about memory pressure and the memcg/pgdat parameters
tell the possible interfaces. Would prefixing a 'do_' be any better?

>That it isn't documented isn't helpful either!

I had done this but felt rather redundant and unnecessary, and further
don't expect for it go gain any other users. But ok, will add.

Thanks,
Davidlohr