linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v12 mm-new 06/15] khugepaged: introduce collapse_max_ptes

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: <f36ba14b-f2e7-4efb-92c0-a4d4f58b1bfd@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2025 18:49:48 +0100
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>,
 Nico Pache <npache@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, ziy@...dia.com,
 baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com, Liam.Howlett@...cle.com,
 ryan.roberts@....com, dev.jain@....com, corbet@....net, rostedt@...dmis.org,
 mhiramat@...nel.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
 akpm@...ux-foundation.org, baohua@...nel.org, willy@...radead.org,
 peterx@...hat.com, wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com, usamaarif642@...il.com,
 sunnanyong@...wei.com, vishal.moola@...il.com,
 thomas.hellstrom@...ux.intel.com, yang@...amperecomputing.com,
 kas@...nel.org, aarcange@...hat.com, raquini@...hat.com,
 anshuman.khandual@....com, catalin.marinas@....com, tiwai@...e.de,
 will@...nel.org, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, jack@...e.cz, cl@...two.org,
 jglisse@...gle.com, surenb@...gle.com, zokeefe@...gle.com,
 hannes@...xchg.org, rientjes@...gle.com, mhocko@...e.com,
 rdunlap@...radead.org, hughd@...gle.com, richard.weiyang@...il.com,
 lance.yang@...ux.dev, vbabka@...e.cz, rppt@...nel.org, jannh@...gle.com,
 pfalcato@...e.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 mm-new 06/15] khugepaged: introduce
 collapse_max_ptes_none helper function

>> Hey Lorenzo,
>>
>>> I mean not to beat a dead horse re: v11 commentary, but I thought we were going
>>> to implement David's idea re: the new 'eagerness' tunable, and again we're now just
>>> implementing the capping at HPAGE_PMD_NR/2 - 1 thing again?
>>
>> I spoke to David and he said to continue forward with this series; the
>> "eagerness" tunable will take some time, and may require further
>> considerations/discussion.
> 
> It would be good to communicate this in the patch, I wasn't aware he had said go
> ahead with it. Maybe I missed the mail.

Just to clarify: yes, I think we should find a way to move forward with 
this series without an eagerness toggle.

That doesn't imply that we'll be using the capping as proposed here (I 
hate it, it's just tricky to work around it for now).

And ideally, we can do that without any temporary tunables, because I'm 
sure it is a problem we can solve internally long-term.

-- 
Cheers

David / dhildenb