netdev - Re: [Lsf-pc] [LSF/MM/BPF proposal]: Physr discussion

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]

Date:   Mon, 23 Jan 2023 12:50:52 -0800
From:   Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
CC:     <nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev>, <lsf-pc@...ts.linuxfoundation.org>,
        <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>, John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
        <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>, Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>,
        <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Joao Martins <joao.m.martins@...cle.com>,
        "Jason Gunthorpe via Lsf-pc" <lsf-pc@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: [Lsf-pc] [LSF/MM/BPF proposal]: Physr discussion

Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 11:36:51AM -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> > Jason Gunthorpe via Lsf-pc wrote:
> > > I would like to have a session at LSF to talk about Matthew's
> > > physr discussion starter:
> > > 
> > >  https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/YdyKWeU0HTv8m7wD@casper.infradead.org/
> > > 
> > > I have become interested in this with some immediacy because of
> > > IOMMUFD and this other discussion with Christoph:
> > > 
> > >  https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/4-v2-472615b3877e+28f7-vfio_dma_buf_jgg@nvidia.com/
> > 
> > I think this is a worthwhile discussion. My main hangup with 'struct
> > page' elimination in general is that if anything needs to be allocated
> 
> You're the first one to bring up struct page elimination.  Neither Jason
> nor I have that as our motivation.

Oh, ok, then maybe I misread the concern in the vfio discussion. I
thought the summary there is debating the ongoing requirement for
'struct page' for P2PDMA?