From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: Chris Down <chris@chrisdown.name>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kernel-team@fb.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel: sysctl: make drop_caches write-only
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2019 10:45:40 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191101144540.GA12808@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191101110901.GB690103@chrisdown.name>
On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 11:09:01AM +0000, Chris Down wrote:
> Hm, not sure why my client didn't show this reply.
>
> Andrew Morton writes:
> > Risk: some (odd) userspace code will break. Fixable by manually chmodding
> > it back again.
>
> The only scenario I can construct in my head is that someone has built
> something to watch drop_caches for modification, but we already have the
> kmsg output for that.
>
> > Reward: very little.
> >
> > Is the reward worth the risk?
>
> There is evidence that this has already caused confusion[0] for many,
> judging by the number of views and votes. I think the reward is higher than
> stated here, since it makes the intent and lack of persistent API in the API
> clearer, and less likely to cause confusion in future.
>
> 0: https://unix.stackexchange.com/q/17936/10762
Yes, I should have mentioned this in the changelog, but:
While mitigating a VM problem at scale in our fleet, there was
confusion about whether writing to this file will permanently switch
the kernel into a non-caching mode. This influences the decision
making in a tense situation, where tens of people are trying to fix
tens of thousands of affected machines: Do we need a rollback
strategy? What are the performance implications of operating in a
non-caching state for several days? It also caused confusion when the
kernel team said we may need to write the file several times to make
sure it's effective ("But it already reads back 3?").
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-01 14:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-31 22:16 [PATCH] kernel: sysctl: make drop_caches write-only Johannes Weiner
2019-10-31 23:28 ` Andrew Morton
2019-11-01 11:09 ` Chris Down
2019-11-01 11:09 ` Chris Down
2019-11-01 14:45 ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
2019-11-01 18:59 ` Andrew Morton
2019-11-01 19:24 ` Chris Down
2019-11-01 19:29 ` Andrew Morton
2019-11-01 19:35 ` Andrew Morton
2019-11-02 15:55 ` Alexey Dobriyan
2019-11-03 19:00 ` Eric W. Biederman
2019-11-01 10:58 ` Chris Down
2019-11-04 10:37 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-11-04 13:25 ` Vlastimil Babka
2019-11-05 6:20 ` Michal Hocko
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20191101144540.GA12808@cmpxchg.org \
--to=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chris@chrisdown.name \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).