[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 15:41:30 +0100
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To: Hoeun Ryu <hoeun.ryu@...il.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] fork: free vmapped stacks in cache when cpus are
offline
On Fri 10-02-17 23:31:41, Hoeun Ryu wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 9:05 PM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> wrote:
> > On Fri 10-02-17 17:32:07, Hoeun Ryu wrote:
[...]
> >> static unsigned long *alloc_thread_stack_node(struct task_struct *tsk, int node)
> >> @@ -456,6 +474,11 @@ void __init fork_init(void)
> >> for (i = 0; i < UCOUNT_COUNTS; i++) {
> >> init_user_ns.ucount_max[i] = max_threads/2;
> >> }
> >> +
> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_VMAP_STACK
> >> + cpuhp_setup_state(CPUHP_AP_ONLINE_DYN, "vm_stack_cache",
> >> + NULL, free_vm_stack_cache);
> >> +#endif
> >
> > I am not familiar the new hotplug infrastructure so I might be missing
> > something. CPUHP_AP_ONLINE_DYN will allocate a state which is has only
> > 30 slots available. The name also suggests this will be called on an
> > online event. Why doesn't this have its own state like other users. The
> > name should also reflect offline event CPUHP_STACK_CACHE_DEAD or
> > something like that.
>
> I'll define CPUHP_VMSTACK_CACHE_DEAD before CPUHP_BP_PREPARE_DYN in
> cpuhotplug.h.
> Do you think the change is made in a separate patch or not ?
I think it should be in a single patch. I am not sure what are the rules
to define a new state though. Let's CC Thomas.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
