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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20231129200305.GI1312390@ziepe.ca> Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2023 16:03:05 -0400 From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca> To: Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com> Cc: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, alex.williamson@...hat.com, alim.akhtar@...sung.com, alyssa@...enzweig.io, asahi@...ts.linux.dev, baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com, bhelgaas@...gle.com, cgroups@...r.kernel.org, corbet@....net, david@...hat.com, dwmw2@...radead.org, hannes@...xchg.org, heiko@...ech.de, iommu@...ts.linux.dev, jasowang@...hat.com, jernej.skrabec@...il.com, jonathanh@...dia.com, joro@...tes.org, kevin.tian@...el.com, krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org, linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, linux-sunxi@...ts.linux.dev, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, lizefan.x@...edance.com, marcan@...can.st, mhiramat@...nel.org, mst@...hat.com, m.szyprowski@...sung.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, paulmck@...nel.org, rdunlap@...radead.org, samuel@...lland.org, suravee.suthikulpanit@....com, sven@...npeter.dev, thierry.reding@...il.com, tj@...nel.org, tomas.mudrunka@...il.com, vdumpa@...dia.com, virtualization@...ts.linux.dev, wens@...e.org, will@...nel.org, yu-cheng.yu@...el.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/16] iommu/fsl: use page allocation function provided by iommu-pages.h On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 02:45:03PM -0500, Pasha Tatashin wrote: > > same kind of big systems where IOMMU pagetables would be of any concern. > > I believe some of the some of the "serious" NICs can easily run up > > hundreds of megabytes if not gigabytes worth of queues, SKB pools, etc. > > - would you propose accounting those too? > > Yes. Any kind of kernel memory that is proportional to the workload > should be accountable. Someone is using those resources compared to > the idling system, and that someone should be charged. There is a difference between charged and accounted You should be running around adding GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT, yes. I already did a bunch of that work. Split that out from this series and send it to the right maintainers. Adding a counter for allocations and showing in procfs is a very different question. IMHO that should not be done in micro, the threshold to add a new counter should be high. There is definately room for a generic debugging feature to break down GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT by owernship somehow. Maybe it can already be done with BPF. IDK Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists