linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v3 0/8] mm,numa: N_PRIVATE node isolation for device-managed memory

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: <4bdf72ea-0b59-41c9-beb4-8072163d567b@nvidia.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2026 12:12:42 +1100
From: Balbir Singh <balbirs@...dia.com>
To: Gregory Price <gourry@...rry.net>
Cc: dan.j.williams@...el.com, Yury Norov <ynorov@...dia.com>,
 linux-mm@...ck.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...a.com, longman@...hat.com,
 tj@...nel.org, hannes@...xchg.org, mkoutny@...e.com, corbet@....net,
 gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, rafael@...nel.org, dakr@...nel.org,
 dave@...olabs.net, jonathan.cameron@...wei.com, dave.jiang@...el.com,
 alison.schofield@...el.com, vishal.l.verma@...el.com, ira.weiny@...el.com,
 akpm@...ux-foundation.org, vbabka@...e.cz, surenb@...gle.com,
 mhocko@...e.com, jackmanb@...gle.com, ziy@...dia.com, david@...nel.org,
 lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com, Liam.Howlett@...cle.com, rppt@...nel.org,
 axelrasmussen@...gle.com, yuanchu@...gle.com, weixugc@...gle.com,
 yury.norov@...il.com, linux@...musvillemoes.dk, rientjes@...gle.com,
 shakeel.butt@...ux.dev, chrisl@...nel.org, kasong@...cent.com,
 shikemeng@...weicloud.com, nphamcs@...il.com, bhe@...hat.com,
 baohua@...nel.org, yosry.ahmed@...ux.dev, chengming.zhou@...ux.dev,
 roman.gushchin@...ux.dev, muchun.song@...ux.dev, osalvador@...e.de,
 matthew.brost@...el.com, joshua.hahnjy@...il.com, rakie.kim@...com,
 byungchul@...com, ying.huang@...ux.alibaba.com, apopple@...dia.com,
 cl@...two.org, harry.yoo@...cle.com, zhengqi.arch@...edance.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 0/8] mm,numa: N_PRIVATE node isolation for
 device-managed memory

On 1/13/26 09:40, Gregory Price wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 13, 2026 at 09:54:32AM +1100, Balbir Singh wrote:
>> On 1/13/26 08:10, dan.j.williams@...el.com wrote:
>>> Balbir Singh wrote:
>>> [..]
>>>>> I agree with Gregory the name does not matter as much as the
>>>>> documentation explaining what the name means. I am ok if others do not
>>>>> sign onto the rationale for why not include _MEMORY, but lets capture
>>>>> something that tries to clarify that this is a unique node state that
>>>>> can have "all of the above" memory types relative to the existing
>>>>> _MEMORY states.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> To me, N_ is a common prefix, we do have N_HIGH_MEMORY, N_NORMAL_MEMORY.
>>>> N_PRIVATE does not tell me if it's CPU or memory related.
>>>
>>> True that confusion about whether N_PRIVATE can apply to CPUs is there.
>>> How about split the difference and call this:
>>>
>>>     N_MEM_PRIVATE
>>>
>>> To make it both distinct from _MEMORY and _HIGH_MEMORY which describe
>>> ZONE limitations and distinct from N_CPU.
>>
>> I'd be open to that name, how about N_MEMORY_PRIVATE? So then N_MEMORY
>> becomes (N_MEMORY_PUBLIC by default)
>>
> 
> N_MEMORY_PUBLIC is forcing everyone else to change for the sake a new
> feature, better to keep it N_MEM[ORY]_PRIVATE if anything
> 

No name change needed, I meant to say N_MEMORY implies N_MEMORY_PUBLIC or
is interpreted as such. Consistency tells me PRIVATE and MEMORY are
required in the names (_MEM is incosistent with N_HIGH_MEMORY and N_NORMAL_MEMORY),
the order can be a choice, I am OK either ways, but I prefer N_PRIVATE_MEMORY.

Balbir