On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 1:31 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> On Fri 01-12-17 08:29:53, Dan Williams wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 8:02 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 11:12:18AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > On Thu 30-11-17 12:01:17, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > >
On Fri 01-12-17 08:29:53, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 8:02 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 11:12:18AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Thu 30-11-17 12:01:17, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:32:42AM -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 8:02 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 11:12:18AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Thu 30-11-17 12:01:17, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:32:42AM -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> > > > > Who and how many LRU pages can pin that way an
On Thu 30-11-17 12:01:17, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:32:42AM -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> > > Who and how many LRU pages can pin that way and how do you prevent nasty
> > > users to DoS systems this way?
> >
> > I assume this is something the RDMA community has had to cont
[ adding linux-rdma ]
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:17 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> On Thu 30-11-17 10:03:26, Dan Williams wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 9:42 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu 30-11-17 08:39:51, Dan Williams wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:53 AM, Michal Hocko
On Thu 30-11-17 10:03:26, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 9:42 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> > On Thu 30-11-17 08:39:51, Dan Williams wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:53 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > On Wed 29-11-17 10:05:35, Dan Williams wrote:
> > > >> Until there is a sol
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 9:42 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> On Thu 30-11-17 08:39:51, Dan Williams wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:53 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Wed 29-11-17 10:05:35, Dan Williams wrote:
> > >> Until there is a solution to the dma-to-dax vs truncate problem it is
> > >> n
On Thu 30-11-17 08:39:51, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:53 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Wed 29-11-17 10:05:35, Dan Williams wrote:
> >> Until there is a solution to the dma-to-dax vs truncate problem it is
> >> not safe to allow long standing memory registrations against
> >> f
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:53 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 29-11-17 10:05:35, Dan Williams wrote:
>> Until there is a solution to the dma-to-dax vs truncate problem it is
>> not safe to allow long standing memory registrations against
>> filesytem-dax vmas. Device-dax vmas do not have this prob
On Wed 29-11-17 10:05:35, Dan Williams wrote:
> Until there is a solution to the dma-to-dax vs truncate problem it is
> not safe to allow long standing memory registrations against
> filesytem-dax vmas. Device-dax vmas do not have this problem and are
> explicitly allowed.
>
> This is temporary un
Until there is a solution to the dma-to-dax vs truncate problem it is
not safe to allow long standing memory registrations against
filesytem-dax vmas. Device-dax vmas do not have this problem and are
explicitly allowed.
This is temporary until a "memory registration with layout-lease"
mechanism ca
11 matches
Mail list logo