Messages in this thread | | | From | Nick Piggin <> | Subject | Re: [00/41] Large Blocksize Support V7 (adds memmap support) | Date | Tue, 11 Sep 2007 16:06:09 +1000 |
| |
On Wednesday 12 September 2007 07:41, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Tue, 11 Sep 2007, Nick Piggin wrote: > > I think I would have as good a shot as any to write a fragmentation > > exploit, yes. I think I've given you enough info to do the same, so I'd > > like to hear a reason why it is not a problem. > > No you have not explained why the theoretical issues continue to exist > given even just considering Lumpy Reclaim in .23 nor what effect the > antifrag patchset would have.
So how does lumpy reclaim, your slab patches, or anti-frag have much effect on the worst case situation? Or help much against a targetted fragmentation attack?
> And you have used a 2M pagesize which is > irrelevant to this patchset that deals with blocksizes up to 64k. In my > experience the use of blocksize < PAGE_COSTLY_ORDER (32k) is reasonably > safe.
I used EXACTLY the page sizes that you brought up in your patch description (ie. 64K and 2MB). - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |