linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] mm: skip folio_activate() for mlocked folios

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: <20251008162901.6652-1-sj@kernel.org>
Date: Wed,  8 Oct 2025 09:29:01 -0700
From: SeongJae Park <sj@...nel.org>
To: Kiryl Shutsemau <kas@...nel.org>
Cc: SeongJae Park <sj@...nel.org>,
	Dmitry Ilvokhin <d@...okhin.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@...weicloud.com>,
	Kairui Song <kasong@...cent.com>,
	Nhat Pham <nphamcs@...il.com>,
	Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>,
	Barry Song <baohua@...nel.org>,
	Chris Li <chrisl@...nel.org>,
	Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@...gle.com>,
	Yuanchu Xie <yuanchu@...gle.com>,
	Wei Xu <weixugc@...gle.com>,
	Usama Arif <usamaarif642@...il.com>,
	linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	kernel-team@...a.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm: skip folio_activate() for mlocked folios

On Wed, 8 Oct 2025 11:33:01 +0100 Kiryl Shutsemau <kas@...nel.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 07, 2025 at 12:53:13PM -0700, SeongJae Park wrote:
> > On Mon, 6 Oct 2025 13:25:26 +0000 Dmitry Ilvokhin <d@...okhin.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > __mlock_folio() does not move folio to unevicable LRU, when
> > > folio_activate() removes folio from LRU.
> > 
> > A trivial opinion.  So the user-visible issue is the incorrect meminfo, right?
> 
> The user-visible effect is that we unnecessary postpone moving pages to
> unevictable LRU that lead to unexpected stats: Mlocked > Unevictable.

Thank you for clarifying!

> 
> > > ---
> > > Changes in v2:
> > >   - Rephrase commit message: frame it in terms of unevicable LRU, not stat
> > >     accounting.
> > 
> > Yet another trivial and personal opinion.  Adding a link to the previous
> > version could be helpful for reviewers like me.
> 
> You probably missed recent Linus rant on Link: tags :P

I didn't miss it [1] :)  And I pretty sure Linus wouldn't be angry for this,
since what he dislikes is meaningless Link: tags on commit messages.  We are
discussing something about changelog after the '---' line, which will anyway
not added to the commit message.  Also I'm saying a link in a general form, not
specifically Link: tag.

[1] https://lwn.net/Articles/1037069/


Thanks,
SJ

[...]